Sie sind auf Seite 1von 74

A 3-V VIEW OF THE ENNEAGRAM: VALUES, VISIONS, AND VULNERABILITIES

Jerry Wagner
When I was first introduced to the Enneagram, we got only the bad stuff -- the distortions, fixations, compulsions, exaggerations, vices, bad breath, etc. When I, in turn, presented the Enneagram styles this way, people would ask: "Isnt there anything good about any of these types?" Apparently there wasnt. So I started to wonder: "Well, what is good about these styles?" Is there something at the core of each style that maybe got distorted by its exaggerated expression? I always liked the ancient Greek notion of sin or fault as hamartia, missing the mark. If you aim at a target, but your arrow or gun barrel is bent, youll miss the target. Sin or disorder is being "bent." Bent doesnt describe the first state of anything. It implies there was a previous condition. And bent contains possibilities of a future condition: being restored to the original state, remaining the same, or becoming more bent to the point of breaking. Evil isnt a separate entity. Its the corruption of an original good which is susceptible to a possible redemption. Sin and disorder are theological and psychological labels, respectively, for this corruption. On the psychological disorder side, Andras Angyal (1965), a neopsychoanalytic therapist, had this to say about neurosis: The essentially personal healthy features exist not beside but within the neurosis; each neurotic manifestation is a distorted expression of an individually shaped healthy trend. The distortion

must be clearly seen and acknowledged, but the healthy core must be found within the distortion itself. (p.228) When the neurosis is discovered to be an exaggerated version of health, the patient feels less shame and more hopeful. So what got distorted in the Enneagram styles? Whats the healthy core that ended up misshapen? To know who you really are, go back the way you came. Start with the exaggerated, bent expression of the self and trace it back to its original state. What does each style really want? Whats of value and importance to each style? And what caused the original valued quality or state to be distorted? The answer to the first two questions leads to the values of each style; the response to the last question points to the vulnerabilities of each style.

Values
If we use a theological paradigm to consider human nature, we might say that each of us is an epiphany of the Divine. From a spiritual point of view, Divinity descends and shows itself through earthly manifestations. While each person, as a child of God, contains all of the characteristics of Divinity, it is our destiny to manifest one or a few of God's features in a particularly clear fashion. Just as we often say of our human lineage: "She is just like her father;" or "He is just like his mother;" and then go on to specify: "He has his father's humor;" or "She has her mother's kindness;" so can we comment about our Divine parentage. In most religious traditions, God has been variously characterized as Good, Loving, Creator, Original, Wise, Loyal, Joyful, Powerful, Peaceful, etc. While every human person possesses these facets of Divinity, some types are particularly attracted to and spontaneously show forth certain of these attributes. For example, some people are naturally inclined towards being good and

perfect as their heavenly father is perfect; while others naturally manifest and are drawn to being loving, or productive, or unique, or wise, or faithful, or playful, or strong, or harmonious. The Enneagram paradigm sorts the characteristics of Divinity into nine clusters. This is a convention of the system and doesnt imply it is the only way of thinking about God and certainly doesnt intend to tell God this is the only way she, he, it, or they can appear. For example, other paradigms prefer to conceptualize God in terms of three or four or ninety-nine. From a psychological phenomenological point of view, human nature shows up in different ways of being in the world with differing worldviews and accompanying ways of experiencing, perceiving, understanding, evaluating, and responding to the world. From the Enneagram perspective, these differing ways of living can be grouped into nine lifestyles, again with the disclaimer that other systems might prefer to sort people into five types or eight types or sixteen types or no types. In the 1920s Eduard Spranger wrote a book Types of Men (1928) expressing his view that people are best understood through the study of their values. Forty years later Gordon Allport, the father of personality psychology, proposed that our personal values are the basis of our philosophy of life. Using Sprangers list of six values, Allport, Vernon, and Lindzey (1960) constructed a Study of Values inventory. Sprangers types are remarkably similar to six Enneatypes. His Social Person is like the Enneagrams Style Two; his Economic Person mimics Style Three; the Aesthetic Person resonates with Style Four; the Theoretical Person resembles Style Five; the Political Person sounds like Style Eight; and his Religious Person blends into Style Nine. Spranger didnt catalog the Enneagrams One, Six, and Seven styles, thus missing out on dedication, security, and fun!

Our motivations and perspectives are influenced by the values we are attracted to and prize. At the heart of each person's orientation to the world lie certain aptitudes and abilities. We experience these energizing talents as values or ideals. While all of these endowments and values are present as potentialities in our core self and while we are capable of appreciating and actualizing all of them, temperamentally we favor some over others and our values stack into a hierarchy, with one or a few being more potent than others. These values are the motivating and organizing tendencies that become central for each person, guiding our energies, perceptions, attitudes, emotional responses, and behaviors. We organize our life around these values which lie at the root of who we are and who we are striving to become.

Values and Visions


Values orient and focus our vision. They tell us what's important and what to live for; they give our lives direction and purpose. From the Enneagram perspective, there are nine sets of values and visions that are at the core of our bent or distorting personality styles. Style One: What do perfectionistists really want? They want to be good persons. They value and are attracted to goodness. They want to realize all their potentials and help others actualize theirs. They envision making the world a better place to live in. Style Two: What do helpers really want? They want to be loving. They want to nurture others and foster relationships. They value and are attracted to love. They envision making the world a more loving place to live in. Style Three: What do achievers really want? They are attracted to and value productivity, industry, competence. They envision making the world more productive, organized, efficient and

smooth running. They want to really make it a cosmos, a harmonious and orderly system. Style Four: What do people who aspire to be special really want? They want to be unique individuals who value originality. They envision putting their personal touch on everything they are involved in. They also value beauty and want to make the world a more beautiful place to live in. Style Five: What do intellectuals really want? They value and are attracted to wisdom, understanding, knowledge, truth. They want to make the world a more enlightened place by discovering what is real and true and making it more intelligible. Style Six: What do a fearful people really want? They want to make the world a safer, more secure, more reliable, more trustworthy place to live in. They are attracted to and value loyalty and stand by their commitments. Style Seven: What do epicures really want? They want to enjoy life and experience all its possibilities. They value joy and variety. They envision making the world a more delightful place to live in. Style Eight: What do bullies and bosses really want? They want to live life fully and freely. They are attracted to, appreciate, and effectively use power. They envision using their strength to influence others and bring about a more just world where power and resources are equitably distributed. Style Nine: What do peacemakers really want? They want to feel at one and at home. They value peace, harmony, and unity. They envision making the world a more harmonious, ecumenical, and comfortable place to live in.

So what happened to these healthy core values that got them distorted into exaggerated caricatures of themselves? To answer this we need to look at our vulnerabilities.

Values and Vulnerabilities


Vulnerabilities are the tender underbelly of our values. We are most sensitive around those areas where we are naturally gifted and which we most prize. Where our strengths are, there lie our weaknesses. When our values are assailed, discounted, derided, or in any way violated, we feel threatened and frightened. When our strengths are challenged, impugned, distrusted, or dismissed, we feel anxious, guilty, ashamed, and angry. Every person shares common human needs such as those for security, consistency, esteem, acceptance, etc. When these basic needs are satisfied, then higher needs for self actualization and self transcendence come to the fore and attract our energy. If certain basic needs are not attended to and fulfilled, then we experience vulnerability around them, accompanied by loss, hurt, fear, and anger. Our energy gathers around these needs to proactively get them met or to reactively shield them, making sure we don't get re-traumatized or neglected again. The anxiety we experience around our area of vulnerability remains with us throughout our lives and, to a greater or lesser extent, so do the defenses we've developed to guard our vulnerable areas to assure we won't get hurt that same way. Just as our body forms a hard protective scab around a physical wound, so does our personality style form as a protective covering around our emotional vulnerabilities. Part of our defensive fortification system involves magnifying and exaggerating our strengths. If our strength lies on the sea, we increase our navy; if our strength lies on land, we bulk up our army; if our advantage lies in the air, we buy more planes. Or we

double the width of our walls, moats, head size, waist-line, etc. Under attack we become more perfect, helping, successful, special, distant, faithful, scattered, aggressive, automatic, etc. Take Clare, for example, who identifies herself as a ONE. When she was in the first grade, her teacher told the class to draw a picture of a person and fill it in with their favorite color. Clare really liked orange and so she colored her picture of a little girl orange. When she looked at her creation, she said: "I like this." "This is good." Apparently Yahweh had the same reaction when s/he stood back and reflected on the universe. So the ONES spontaneous judgment coming from their authentic self is: "Its good!" The teacher asked the class to hand in their pictures and began looking through them. Clare hoped she would like her drawing and maybe even show it to the class. Sure enough thats just what the teacher did. She held up Clares picture and asked the class if they had ever seen an orange person. Wasnt it odd that someone would draw a person orange? Why would anyone draw an orange person? She then put Clares picture down and went through some other drawings. So now Clare felt ashamed, having been publicly humiliated. There are several ways she could have responded to this event, depending on how resilient she was and depending on what personality style she might be. If she were an EIGHT, she could put out a contract on the teacher and that would be the end of the matter. If she were a SIX, she could call her father, or better, her fathers attorney. If she were a TWO she could ask the teacher if she could stay after school and clean the boards for her. As a ONE she could decide to roll with the punches and affirm that she herself was O.K. and that the teacher was having a bad day. Actually the teacher had many bad days and was fired at the end of the year. But the injury was done.

As a little ONE, Clare decided that she would do all she could to make sure she wouldnt be hurt this way again. At first the locus of evaluation was inside her and she considered her work to be good. Since the locus of evaluation had been removed from her and now resided in the teacher, she had to ascertain what were the expectations of her teacher so she could live up to them. The next time the teacher said color your figure with your favorite color, Clare would inquire: "Just what colors did you have in mind?" What are your expectations for this picture or this paper? What is the job description for this position? What are the standard operating procedures of this company that Im expected to comply with?" Also Clare would scrutinize her work over and over to make sure it was high quality and up to standards. Actually her standards became higher than anyone elses and so any external criticism of her productions would pale in comparison to her own critical appraisals. In short, Clare was becoming a little perfectionist, adhering to the maxim: "If youre perfect, you cant be criticized." What have other authors said about vulnerabilities?

Vulnerabilities and Interpersonal Relations


Michael Balint, a British object relations analyst, labels these areas of sensitivity basic faults (1979). D.W. Winnicott, a fellow object relations theorist, calls them primary agonies (1986). Susan Nathanson Elkind (1992) refers to them as primary vulnerabilities. One broad area these vulnerabilities touch is our sense of self. We want to experience ourselves as whole, lively, cohesive, continuous, and worthwhile. We feel vulnerable and anxious when we experience our self as partial, deflated, fragmented, disintegrated, diffused, or worthless.

Another general area of vulnerability has to do with our relationships. We seek to maintain, preserve, and enhance the bonds and connections we have with significant other people in our lives. We feel vulnerable and anxious when we experience separation, abandonment, neglect, rejection, betrayal, or being unwanted. Since we are selves-in-relation, we want to remain in relationship while striving to separate and individuate our selves. Throughout our lives we seek to balance this polarity of autonomy and communion. The areas of vulnerability which each of us are susceptible to result from the interaction between our innate inheritance (our temperament, constitution, character, biological endowment) and our environment (mainly represented by our primary caretakers.) Through the interactions between what we bring with us into the world and who and what we meet in the world, we learn which behaviors, feelings, thoughts and images will preserve and enhance our connections to others, maintain a coherent sense of ourselves, and nurture and protect those values we are naturally attracted to. These mental inner object relations or representations of self-other-interactions become templates or maps for guiding our relationships for the rest of our lives. All of us share these basic human needs and we are all exposed to these primary vulnerabilities. How acute, disturbing, disruptive, and anxiety provoking they become depends on our nervous system and how we were raised. If our constitution is basically healthy and hearty, we can negotiate these vulnerabilities and remain whole and connected. When we are born into an "average expectable environment" and our parents or caretakers are "good enough," we will still

experience these primary vulnerabilities but will do so in the company of loving advocates and guides. And we can negotiate these vulnerabilities with resilience and confidence and a tolerable dose of anxiety. But if our constitution is enfeebled and/or our parents had their own share of primary vulnerabilities that they weren't equipped to deal with, then we will be exposed to these vulnerable areas without someone to help us through them, someone who holds us and processes these vulnerabilities for us until we learn to do it for ourselves. Being healthy doesnt mean being without needs and vulnerabilities. It involves recognizing and acknowledging our needs and then effectively negotiating to get them met. A less resourceful approach is to build a battlement around our vulnerable areas, which keeps us safe and secure, but doesnt get our needs met. People living in fortresses eventually run out of supplies or become bored to death. In some spiritual traditions, such as those congenial to the Enneagram, this resourceful self is called our essence while the less-resourceful self is called personality. Essence is our original self; personality is our compensatory caricature self. Essence is proactive, leading us toward our values. Personality is reactive, putting up protective barriers around our primary vulnerabilities to make sure we dont get hurt again. Much "inner child" work has to do with uncovering and healing the wounds and vulnerabilities we sustained and endured as we were growing up. We discover where the child within us is hiding, how she hides herself, what she is hiding from, and what she really needs for herself. By suggesting where our sensitivities lie, the Enneagram model can be a useful guide in our search for and

reconnection with our inner child with his or her fears, vulnerabilities and defenses.

Vulnerabilities and Personality Styles


The Enneagram perspective points to nine clusters of primary vulnerabilities that naturally accompany nine sets of values. The values, vulnerabilities, and compensatory strategies of the nine personality paradigms are summarized below. A fuller description of how each type deals with these vulnerabilities will follow. One Sore Spots -- Valuing being good and taking pride in being right, ONES are especially sensitive to criticism and being told they are wrong. Their perfectionist style is a way of assuring they wont be criticized. You cant criticize them if theyre perfect or blame them as long as theyre trying really hard. Two Sore Spots -- Valuing relationships and taking pride in being loving and generous, TWOS are easily hurt by rejection and by a lack of attention and appreciation shown them. They are sensitive to feeling useless and unneeded. Their rescuing style is an attempt to gain recognition, gratitude, and acceptance and to make themselves necessary and important in the lives of others. Three Sore Spots -- Valuing success and taking pride in their accomplishments, THREES are hurt by rejection and failure. Their achieving style is an attempt to be successful and to maintain relationships through performing and doing for others. Their concern about image and looking good has to do with getting people to like them. Four Sore Spots -- Valuing relationships and belonging and taking pride in being special, FOURS are easily hurt by feeling abandoned or left out, or by going unnoticed. They are sensitive to feeling flawed, undesirable, unwanted. Their style of being

special is an attempt to get others to notice them and keep others connected to them. Five Sore Spots -- Valuing privacy and their own personal space, and taking pride in their knowledge, FIVES are easily spooked by being invaded, having demands and expectations put on them, and being deprived, belittled or ridiculed. Their knowing and loner style is an attempt to ward off intrusions, be self sufficient, and avoid looking foolish. Six Sore Spots -- Valuing fidelity, consistency, and security and taking pride in being loyal, SIXES are scared by perceived threats and challenges. They are vulnerable to being caught off guard and to the misuse of authority. Their phobic style (loyal and dependent) or counter-phobic style (rebellious and independent) are two sides of the same coin which seeks to purchase safety and security. Seven Sore Spots -- Valuing enjoyment, freedom, and variety and taking pride in being upbeat and resourceful, SEVENS are brought down when their options are limited. They are deflated by having their balloons burst, parades rained on, and parties pooped. Their sunny-side-up style is an attempt to stay on the high side of life and experience as much as life has to offer. Eight Sore Spots -- Valuing justice and autonomy and taking pride in being strong, EIGHTS are particularly irked by being neglected, being unjustly treated, and feeling powerless. Their powerful style is their way of being in charge and guaranteeing they will be heard, won't feel weak, and wont be taken advantage of. Nine Sore Spots -- Valuing unity and harmony and taking pride in being settled, NINES are especially wary of and torn apart by conflict. They are easily hurt by neglect. Their relaxed, resigned style is an attempt to defend against feeling uncared for and

having to assert themselves -- which might disrupt the flow of the universe. To summarize what weve said so far: Values tell us whats important to us and what to look for. Vulnerabilities tell us whats threatening to us and what to look out for. Both influence and guide our vision or world view, our outlook on and orientation to the world. When we are motivated by and focused on what we genuinely value, our vision tends to be clear, adaptive, and aligned with reality. Our values intuitively lead us to what is really there. When we are focused on our vulnerabilities and what we are afraid of, our perceptions are more likely to be opaque, maladaptive, and distorting of reality. We fantasize what we are afraid is there or what we expect to be there. Lets look more closely at the vulnerabilities and defensive maneuvers of the nine styles and see what the Enneagram suggests are more effective responses to perceived danger and threats.

Style One: the Good Person


The primary vulnerability for ONES, the interpersonal transaction they are most sensitized to, is being criticized. Being found at fault is hurtful, shameful, threatening, damaging, and the pain ONES most want to escape. To avoid being censured, with the wounding and possible rejection it entails, is the raison dtre of their personality. ONES are also quite sensitive about being wronged as well as being wrong. Their radar scans for any signs of injustice towards

others or themselves. When this area of vulnerability is touched, some underlying maladaptive schemas may get triggered: "Im never good enough." "Im not perfect." "Im wrong." "Im the worst ever." "Im not deserving." "I must work hard." "If things are easy, theyre not worthwhile." "Process is bad. Only a perfect product is good." When ONES' assess that they are not right or good enough, or when their inner censors pick up the scent of being judged to be wrong, their panoply of defensive maneuvers goes into action. The banner of their idealized self image "I am right" is unfurled and waved in your face; their righteous anger and resentment come front and center to energize them and guard the gates of their self-esteem; their defense mechanism of reaction formation is deployed to insure they do the right thing and to assure that they are right and you are wrong; they cover their flanks and screen their awareness lest any unacceptable faults enter their field of consciousness. We can tell when our area of primary vulnerability has been breached when we mobilize for war with minimal provocations. At this time of perceived maximum threat, the Enneagram suggests that ONES need to shift out of the "red alert" sounded by their ego and shift into their essence. They need to stay centered in their real self in the here and now, switch from critical judgmental mode to aware and discerning mode, and remind themselves to remain serene. From this objective resourceful state they have a clear perspective and multiple options to care

for their primary vulnerability. Acting from their stressed-out lessresourceful subjective state gives them a distorted view and limited emotional and behavioral responses to protect their vulnerable self. ONES need to remember that what they really need and want is to be accepted for who they are and all they bring, to feel good and right about themselves, and to be respected and loved. While their defensive strategies keep them safe and guarded against criticism, they dont guarantee their deeper desires will be met. Ironically their angry "I am right" approach gets in the way of their real needs being satisfied and may even bring about the very thing they fear: more criticism and rejection. The more ONES proclaim their rightness, the more others take potshots at their faults.

Style Two: the Loving Person


Being alone and separate are touchy areas for TWOS. Because they value relationships and being connected, they are particularly sensitive to interpersonal interactions that they perceive to be rejecting, disconnecting, isolating, betraying, or abandoning. Criticism is interpreted as not being loved. When their vulnerability to rejection is threatened, their maladaptive schemas are likely to arise. "Im not important." "Im not useful." "I must make myself indispensable." "You are more important than I am." "Im not enough without others." "If I connect with you, youll want to connect with me, and Ill be validated."

"I cant count on or trust others; its all up to me." "Others needs must be met first before mine can be met." "Its not OK to do things for myself." "I cant be separate and independent and be loved and connected at the same time." Their defensive strategies are designed to assure that they won't be rejected and left alone. If they sense any kind of disconnection or abandonment, their false personality takes over and trumpets their self- image of how helpful they are; their pride puffs them up and energizes them for service; they repress their needs and adapt themselves to the needs of others. "If I'm important to you and meet all of your needs, you won't want to leave me." Who in their right mind would want to disconnect their indispensable umbilical cord, iron lung, or kidney dialysis machine? TWOS make a living out of being selfobjects, to use Kohuts terminology, doing for others what others need to internalize and do for themselves. Paradoxically this very strategy necessitates the TWOS abandoning themselves by leaving their needs behind. Their reactive strategy brings about the very thing they are seeking to avoid. By helping and serving others before others have a chance to spontaneously express their affection for and affirmation of them, TWOS are never sure whether others really care for them or whether the TWOS have once again cajoled this connection and closeness. And when TWOS are overly solicitous and smothering, others tend to push them away or move back from them. Thus the TWOS helping strategy backfires and they end up feeling rejected and abandoned, which is just what they dreaded all along. So their defensive strategy doesnt really get them what they want, which is to feel connected, cared for, loved, wanted, and

needed for themselves not for what they can do for others. If TWOS stay centered in their authentic self when their primary vulnerability is threatened, they can tolerate a give and take to occur. Their essence allows the alternating current of love to flow into them as well as out of them. The virtue of humility breaks open the soil of their psyche so it can soak in the caring that is available if only TWOS will drink it in. For grace to be received, TWOS must be open to it. Their inner freedom grants God and grace permission to enter into their real self and then be channeled to others. What God wills more than anything else is that we experience ourselves as loved and then spontaneously return that love.

Style Three: the Effective Person


Like ONES and TWOS, THREES report being sensitive and susceptible to criticism and rejection. They feel hurt when they are not paid attention to or dont receive recognition. Failures in relationships are the ultimate failures for THREES. Their projects and performances are done to get admiration. And when approval is not evident, THREES interpret this as failure. THREES also say they feel vulnerable when they are forced to be inactive (through lay offs, health problems, etc.). They then feel useless and not worth anything. Intimations of failure are likely to trigger their maladaptive schemas. "Im not successful enough." "I can always be more successful." "Im a failure." "I am what I do."

"I must produce and achieve to be loved." "I must fulfill my role and meet others expectations." "To whom much is given, much is required." "I cant trust other people." "I need to trick other people into believing in me." When THREES find themselves approaching any kind of failure experience, their defensive mechanisms go into high gear. Their self-image of being successful is highlighted, their marketing strategies pick up, and they deceive themselves and others into believing they are important because of all they can achieve. Since I perform well, please others, and accomplish great things, why would anyone want to reject me? As THREES get anxious, their self recedes and their image and projects take center stage. Unfortunately this maneuver just prolongs the THREES' doubt about whether they are loved and affirmed for themselves or for their productions. Their accomplishments, images, and roles come between their real self and others' real selves. Paradoxically their defensive approach is ultimately not successful because THREES can't maintain their charade forever. Eventually others realize the person behind the mask is not present. Interacting through a persona or as a productive machine is not satisfying for either THREES or others. Relationships become distant and separation ensues. Also THREES get so caught up in all their works and projects that they don't have time to enjoy the relationships they do have. And so their defensive maneuvers thwart their genuine needs to feel accepted and affirmed for being vs. for doing, to be liked and acknowledged for themselves, to be authentically responded to, and to have a life that has significance and meaning.

The hope provided by their essence enables THREES to remain truthful and bonded to themselves and others when their primary vulnerability is threatened. Their real self remains present and engaged and is thereby most effective. Only in genuine I-Thou relationships do their real selves get the belonging and affirmation they really desire --which they may have mistakenly sought through the achievements of their false selves, or it-it transactions. As is the case with every other unsuccessful egoic approach, the way out of our dilemma is the route we least want to take. And so, paradoxically, the way to get unstuck for THREES is failure, the condition they most want to avoid. Yet an inordinate number of THREES say that experiencing failure was precisely what broke the trance of their compulsion. It shattered their successful image and allowed their real self to emerge. The failure of a marriage, the mental illness of a child, the bankruptcy of a company broke their quest for a perfect 300 game and splintered the successful illusion of their personality. While initially awful, failure ultimately brought freedom and peace.

Style Four: the Original Person


A primary vulnerability of all human beings is the fear of being abandoned or rejected. Some personality theorists would say this is the primary human vulnerability. Being abandoned is certainly what a helpless infant and child fears most and this anxiety diminishes very little in adults. It is the area of vulnerability that FOURS are most acutely sensitive to. They are fearful of being left out or left behind and are hurt by feeling neglected, ignored, and uncared for. FOURS are also vulnerable to feeling flawed, defective, unwanted, and uninteresting. They report they are sensitive to

being criticized about their style or taste and are hurt by any lack of recognition of their creativity. When these areas of vulnerability are breached, the FOURS maladaptive schemas are likely to arise. "Im not special." "Im lacking, deficient, flawed, missing something." "Im not good enough." "Im not loved or noticed enough." "Im not worthy of being loved." "Im different." "No one understands me." "I have to go it alone." "If I get what others have, Ill find my real self." "A special love will make me whole, complete, valuable." Their defensive interpersonal style was established to protect them from being and feeling abandoned. If they fear they are about to be left behind, their self image that they are special and unique gets activated; their envy scans the environment and queries the mirror as to who is the fairest in the land; they repress their ordinariness in favor of becoming out of the ordinary, if not extraordinary. "If I'm special and impact your life in a memorable manner, you will never forget me." The ego strategy that FOURS devise to keep themselves from being abandoned leads them to abandon their authentic self which is the real basis of their feeling lost, unnoticed, and unwanted. They miss themselves. FOURS often devalue and reject themselves before others have a chance to. Having left themselves behind, they must seek outside to complete themselves. As is the case with the "neurotic solutions" of other styles, the FOURS strategy of being very intense or very attached may

paradoxically scare people away. Or they may reject others first before any suitors predictably abandon them. Tragically their defensive tactics frustrate their authentic desires to belong, to discover themselves, to be original, to be ordinary, and to feel connected to others. If FOURS remain moored to their essence when their primary vulnerability is threatened, they will be authentic and they can engage the essences of others and feel related. If they move to envy, they contact their false personalities and the false selves of others and feel lonely. Their adaptive self keeps them attuned to reality instead of to their fantasies, while their virtue of equanimity leads them to their commonness that relates FOURS to all other creatures. Ironically, what they fear most, being ordinary, brings them to what they desire most, being connected.

Style Five: the Wise Person


Primary vulnerabilities for FIVES include feeling deprived and emptied; feeling intruded upon and engulfed; feeling exposed and foolish. FIVES report they are also sensitive to becoming too visible, being evaluated or put down, feeling inadequate and lost, being dependent, and living someone elses life. These are the interpersonal events and early woundings their defensive style hopes to prevent from ever happening again. If these sensibilities are piqued, the FIVES maladaptive schemas may become operable. "I dont understand well enough." I dont know how." "I cant do it." "Im out of it." "Im inadequate."

"Im foolish." "Im bad." "I cant rely on others." The world is non-negotiable." "Im safe if I know enough, dont feel, dont get involved, and am left alone." FIVES' hyper alert radar is continually scanning for any signs of invasion, encroachment, expectation, demand, deprivation, or ridicule. If any hint of these threats appears on their radar screen, they deploy their distancing and intellectualizing apparatus, become driven by their greedy grasping for knowledge and invisibility, avoid their feelings and involvement, detach, and move up and away from the scene as helicopter-like as they can. Unfortunately, FIVES strategy brings about the very thing theyre trying to avoid. Since nature abhors a vacuum, as FIVES retreat, others follow. Their withdrawing invites further intrusions. Or if they remain a blank screen and say nothing, others will fill in the blank by projecting their own interpretations about what the FIVES are thinking, feeling, etc. And these projections could be worse than anything the FIVES might actually be imagining. While the FIVES non-resourceful strategy keeps them hidden, at a distance, and safe, it doesnt get their deeper needs for affiliation met. What FIVES really need and want is to be themselves in relationships, to connect with others without disowning themselves. They want interdependence not hyperindependence; they want privacy but not isolation. FIVES want to understand and be understood and to be appreciated for having knowledge. They want to feel competent -- physically, socially, and emotionally as well as intellectually. When theyre feeling vulnerable, FIVES need to remain centered in their essence (not to be confused with their cave), detaching themselves from their hiding place but staying connected to

themselves while engaging with others. They need to shift from withholding to holding with. In other words they need to stay in the game, moving towards or against others instead of moving away from what is happening.

Style Six: the Loyal Person


The primary vulnerability for SIXES is being betrayed and caught off guard. SIXES got surprised, disappointed, and hurt enough times that they developed a personality style to protect them and guarantee they wouldnt get caught off guard any more. Their wary lens searches for hidden intentions and looks over their shoulder to protect them from sneak attacks. Betty, a SIX, related this incident that happened to her when she was a little girl. Her father came home one day and told her they were going to the ice cream parlor. Delighted, she excitedly followed him. They got in the car, drove past the ice cream store, and on to the dentist's office! And you wonder why SIXES are suspicious, why they are ambivalent about trusting authorities, why they seek to know what others really mean, and why they get into the habit of second guessing. Because Betty thought of herself as a loyal person, she valued being trustworthy and keeping her word. So she was particularly sensitive to any kind of betrayal or abuse of trust. She was disappointed and hurt by her fathers deceit and honed her personality style to make sure she wouldnt be caught off guard like that again. Exaggerating her vigilant qualities, she cultivated a wary and cautious life style, probing others statements to discover what they really meant behind what they said. Like: "What do you mean, ice cream store?" Developing compensatory strengths around her primary vulnerability, Betty became a very loyal hyper-alert, employee.

SIXES also say they are just as sensitive to betraying others as they are to being betrayed. They can be harshly critical of themselves if they disclose others confidences or if they are unable to do something they promised to do. Vulnerable to feelings of insecurity and reactive to inconsistencies in others, SIXES are sensitive to disruptions and a lack of order. They are fearful of being thrown out of the group or of being given responsibilities before they have the abilities. They dont like to feel trapped and are sensitive to being deceived or treated unfairly and not being heard or listened to. As these sensitive situations arise, so do the SIXES maladaptive schemas. "I cant trust myself." "Im not sure of myself." "I doubt myself." "Im ambivalent." "Im vulnerable and damageable." "I might disintegrate." "The world is threatening and getting too close." "Being visible and exposed is dangerous." "Nothing is what it seems." "There is safety in numbers and structures." What SIXES really need and want is to feel safe and secure, to experience consistency, to belong to a group where they feel accepted and OK, to be listened to and have their side taken, to be connected even when theyre afraid. While their defensive strategy appears to keep them safe, it really doesnt secure the fulfillment of their deeper needs. Paradoxically their paranoia guarantees that people will begin talking behind their backs. Their fearfulness attracts predators and their doubts incline others to take over for them. The more tightly they constrict

their borders, the more potential friends and allies they exclude. Their fears magnify and create dangers where there arent any. And when SIXES sense danger, deception, or betrayal, they deploy their personality arsenal. They scan for enemies and hidden intentions; they heighten their worries and fears to be alert and prepared; they project their own untoward intentions onto others so they feel pure and so theyll always know whats coming their way -- themselves; they embrace, avoid, or challenge authorities to feel safe. In the moment their primary vulnerability is breached, when they fear they are being blind sided, caught off guard, or betrayed, SIXES need to seek the sanctuary of their essence where they are ultimately safe and secure, for nothing can disable their essence except their own self doubt. In their real self they find the courage to be and this fortitude provides a resourceful energy for SIXES, enabling them to feel their fears and deal with them calmly and directly.

Style Seven: the Joyful Person


SEVENS are particularly sensitive to being limited by having their options curtailed. They also have a great fear of being boring or being bored, like being in a routine job or a mundane relationship. SEVENS believe they should have it all - - or at least try it all. Feeling tied down, pinned down, or committed are quite anxiety provoking for SEVENS. Feeling trapped, immobilized, paralyzed, sick, or lifeless are variations of this stuck theme. SEVENS also report they are very sensitive to pain, suffering, depression, hurt and other dysphoric feelings. They are vulnerable around a lack of hope or encouragement.

Their defense against being focused or contained is to scatter. Its hard to capture a moving target like a wily coyote. SEVENS jump around in their fantasies and so earn the sobriquet "scatterbrained"; move around in their careers and become Jacks and Jackies of all trades; shuttle around in their relationships and become promiscuous; or travel around the globe and become nomads. Diffusing themselves through multiple interests and defusing others through humor are ways SEVENS keep from being bogged down. Some of the SEVENS maladaptive schemas might appear when theyre feeling threatened. "Im not O.K. but Id better appear O.K." "Im limited and thats terrible." "I must have options." "Freedom means keeping your options open." "Commitment is a trap." "More is better." "Im entitled." "I have to plan." "The process is more important than the product." When SEVENS start to feel restricted, inadequate, and not all right, they trumpet their self-image of I'm O.K., activate their vice of gluttony, head "downtown" to avoid any unpleasantness or pain, and sublimate to the max. Paradoxically, the pursuit of unlimited pleasures is in itself quite limiting. While SEVENS gain mobility, they lose stability; they get to travel but dont have a home; they gain variety but miss out on depth; they have the Yin without the Yang. They live in a land of never-ending sun. How boring is that? Like the rest of us, what SEVENS really want is to be happy. They want to be both free and committed; they want to have choices

within commitments. While their defensive approach provides them with options, it may not give them satisfying long-term relationships. When SEVENS are feeling vulnerable, they need to keep in touch with their true self by staying sober in the present, keeping focused, and trusting and remaining connected to whatever is real -- which may include suffering and pain. True happiness, according to Aristotle, is a by-product of action. If sought directly, it is evanescent. It is experienced through persistently working with reality in the here and now.

Style Eight: the Powerful Person


The areas of vulnerability that EIGHTS are especially sensitive to are being unjustly and unfairly treated, being neglected, and feeling powerless. They dont like feeling limited, dependent, subordinated, not in control. They want to do what they want, when they want. Having to be docile in the presence of an incompetent or abusive authority is particularly onerous and maddening. EIGHTS do not like to be figuratively bound and gagged around people they don't respect. Quite the contrary their style is designed to prevent this from happening. EIGHTS feel better speaking their mind, stating their objections, and making their observations of ineptitude even if it means getting fired, divorced, ostracized, etc. They would rather form a new corporation, relationship, or gang. Their approach to not being heard or paid attention to is not the coward's way of withdrawing to the sidelines, hoping to be seen, nor the diplomat's way of subtle negotiation and compromise. EIGHTS get heard because they are forceful and persuasive. If you didn't hear them the first time, they'll tell you again and keep

telling you until you acknowledge their position. Or they cause a commotion. Embarrassment and intimidation can be the EIGHTS manner of communicating. For example if the garbage in their neighborhood is not being picked up promptly, they might first write a letter to their alderman. However, if there were no response, the EIGHTS would then organize all the neighbors to collect their garbage, dump it on the alderman's lawn, and picket his or her house until humiliation and bad publicity prompted action. Victory does not belong to the subtle. When adversity arrives, some of the EIGHTS maladaptive schemas may arrive with it. "Its not O.K. to be weak." "Its not O.K. to be afraid." "Its not O.K. to admit I cant do it." "I can only trust and count on myself." "The world is hostile, tough, and harsh." "Im in danger." "Life is a struggle. I must fight to live." "Only the strong survive." The EIGHTS' style of life is an attempt to guarantee they will not be treated unjustly or unfairly again. They become the justice makers, meting out rewards and punishments. Standing up for themselves and for the disenfranchised, they don't permit any power to be taken from them without a fight. They follow an "eye for an eye" diplomatic policy, deploying vengeance as a way of restoring equity, the balance of power. What EIGHTS eventually discover is that their aggressive approach to life brings about the very things they fear. Anger begets anger; aggression leads to retaliation; power plays invite counter-maneuvers; dictators provoke revolutions; the world does indeed come to be hostile and dangerous. If EIGHTS become too

sociopathic, they are put in prison where their worst fears of being limited and not in control are realized. What EIGHTS really need and want is to feel in control of themselves and their surroundings, to be respected, accepted, and approved of, to be treated justly and equitably, to be persons of integrity and honor, to be self-determined and their own person, to be spoken up for. Their defensive strategies might keep them in charge and in their castle, but they dont necessarily bring them respect, compassion, or companionship. When they are feeling threatened, EIGHTS need to stay centered in their essence instead of shifting into their street-fighter personality. Their real self exudes an aura of innocence: "Why would anyone want to hurt me and why would I want to hurt anyone?" Allowing justice to be administered by a power higher than themselves and entrusting themselves to this authority, they find they are powerful in ways they never imagined.

Style Nine: the Peaceful Person


The early wounding that NINES experienced resulted from their perception that they didnt matter, werent that important, and werent worth being noticed or cared about. NINES say they are sensitive to being neglected, feeling shamed, crushed, or left defenseless. They are sensitive to conflict, confrontation, disharmony, and to being criticized or punished for hurting others out of anger. Instead of facing this painful reality that, apparently, they didn't matter that much to their parents since their parents didn't show them much attention, NINES assumed the less painful stance of resignation. They took the attitude of: So what? It doesn't matter (which is less painful than I don't matter.) What's the difference?

Why make a big deal out of anything? Life is short, anyway. So NINES resigned themselves and settled in for the duration. They turned down their energy, lowered their expectations, and began their long hibernation. NINES weren't listened to and so they learned to not listen to themselves and their needs, preferences, wants, feelings, and own ideas. No one asked them what they thought, valued, or wanted and so they subsequently forget to ask themselves. As adults, NINES often don't know what kind of person they would like to be, what kind of work they might like to pursue, or what kind of partner they prefer to marry. When their sensibilities are stepped on, the NINES maladaptive schemas surface. "I dont matter." "Im not important." "Im not cared for." "Its not O.K. to be upset." "I shouldnt stand out." "Its more important to be nice than to be true to myself." "Its not O.K. to show anger because conflict destroys." "I must avoid my feelings or Ill go to pieces." "Everything is the same. Nothing matters." "If Im not here, Im safe." Whenever their desires and wants become figural, the NINES' automatic response comes into play to push them into the background. They defocus, distract themselves, become indolent, avoid conflict, and fall asleep. And, as we have seen with every other type, the NINES defensive strategy eventually creates the very situation it sought to avoid. The more NINES blend into the background, the more non-descript and bland they become, the more they go unnoticed

and neglected. Procrastination makes matters worse and eventually heightens conflict. Ignoring a tumor doesnt cure it; it grows through neglect. While their egos solution might keep them calm, it doesnt bring them what they really want and need which is to be loved, cared for, and noticed. Also, along with garnering esteem in the eyes of others, NINES need self-acceptance and self-esteem. They want to be at peace with their inner feelings, especially their angry ones. They want to be proactive and speak up for themselves. And, while doing so, they want to maintain their sense of union and harmony. They want to experience inter-being. What NINES need to do when their vulnerability is breached is stay in touch with their essential feelings, preferences, and values, let them emerge, and act on them. They need to trust that their passions will not irrevocably disturb the harmony of the spheres. Actually their desires are part of the energy system of the universe that keeps it evolving through a process of differentiation and integration. NINES need to honor both the polarizing as well as the harmonizing dimensions of the evolutionary process.

SUMMARY
The following chart summarizes this 3-V look at the Enneagram. Well, actually, its up to 4-Vs now, since I added Virtues and Vices.

We are motivated by and attracted to certain values that we prize and want to promulgate. When others are not so enamored of our values, we can feel hurt and sensitive around our trampled treasures. Vulnerabilities are the tender underbelly of our values. If we deal with our vulnerabilities in resourceful ways, our values are projected as ideals which inform our visions of how we would like to be and how we would like the world to be. These visions contain adaptive cognitive schemas that are accompanied by adaptive emotional schemas or virtues. Our visions and virtues lead to the actualization of our authentic self. When we react to our vulnerabilities in a defensive manner, our values appear as idealizations, exaggerated self images of how we think we should be in order to survive. These idealized self images are distortions of our genuine values and give rise to maladaptive cognitive schemas about who we are and what the world is like. These warping visions get energized by vices, the distorted expression of our life energy. The combinations of wrong ideas plus bad vibes represent the egos attempt to maintain the integrity of the self. Ironically, though, its the personality that gets preserved while the genuine self remains hidden.

Bibliography
Allport, G.W., Vernon, P., & Lindzey, G. (1960). A Study of Values (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Angyal, A. (1965). Neurosis and Treatment: a Holistic Theory. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Balint, M. (1979). The Basic Fault: Therapeutic Aspects of Regression. New York: Brunner/Mazel. Elkind, S. (1992). Resolving Impasses in Therapeutic Relationships. New York: Guilford. Spranger.E. (1928). Types of Men. [P.J.W.Pigors (Trans.)] Halle, Germany: Niemeyer. Winnicott, D. (1986). Fear of Breakdown. In G. Kohon (Ed) The British School Of Psychoanalysis: the Independent Tradition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Values and Visions


From the Enneagram perspective there are nine sets of values and visions that appear as the following styles: Style One: You value and are attracted to goodness. You envision making the world a better place to live in. You want to realize all of your potentials and help others actualize theirs. Style Two: You value and are attracted to love. You envision making the world a more loving place to live in. You want to foster relationships Style Three: You are attracted to and value productivity, industry, competence. You envision making the world more productive, organized, efficient and smooth running. You want to really make it a cosmos, a harmonious and orderly system. Style Four: You are highly individual and value originality and uniqueness. You envision putting your personal touch on everything you are involved in. You also value beauty and want to make the world a more beautiful place to live in. Style Five: You value and are attracted to wisdom, understanding, knowledge, truth. You envision discovering what is real, understanding the world, and making it more intelligible. You want to make the world a more enlightened place. Style Six: You are attracted to and value loyalty. You stand by your commitments. You envision making the world a safer, more secure, more reliable, more trustworthy place to live in.

Style Seven: You want to enjoy life and experience all its possibilities. You value joy and were born to play. You envision making the world a more delightful place to live in. Style Eight: You are attracted to, appreciate, and effectively use power. You envision using your strength to influence others and bring about a more just world where power and resources are equitably distributed. You want to live life fully and freely. Style Nine: You value and seek peace, harmony, unity. You seek to make the world a more harmonious ecumenical place to live in. You want to feel at one and at home.

Values and Proficiencies


Our values and visions give us an intuitive perceptual and behavioral edge. Each of the nine styles possesses an intuitive capacity to see certain realities very clearly and demonstrates a particular facility in their valued domain. 1) The Good Person has high standards and ideals, intuitively senses how things could be, recognizes where they currently are, and instinctively nudges reality from a less perfect to a more perfect state. They naturally strive for excellence. 2) The Loving Person is naturally empathic, sensitive to others' needs, and generous with their time and energy. 3) The Effective Person is naturally well organized, knows how to set goals and work towards them, and accomplishes things efficiently. They have an uncanny sense for packaging and marketing their image and product. 4) The Sensitive Person has an aesthetic sense for appreciating and expressing beauty. They have an innate sense for quality. Their sensibility easily puts them in touch with their own and others' moods. They are particularly attuned to pain and suffering. 5) The Wise Person can easily detach and be observant. They naturally analyze to get to the heart of the matter and synthesize to get the whole picture. 6) The Loyal Person gives their word and keeps it. They hold tenaciously to what they believe in and have committed themselves to. They intuitively sense what might go wrong. They have a sixth sense for danger. 7) The Joyful Person can facilely find the good in everything. They intuitively sense what might go right. They possess a natural childlike responsiveness, optimism and spontaneity. They are also adept at seeing into the future and visioning possibilities. 8) The Powerful Person intuitively senses where power resides. They understand power and know how to get, keep, and use it.

Sensitive to justice and injustice, they are naturally self assured, magnanimous, and protectors of the underdog. 9) The Peaceful Person has an intuitive sense for when things fit together. They are natural conciliators and easily go with the flow. They have an uncanny ability to merge with the people around them.

HOW WE STAY STUCK IN OUR STYLES: Schema Maintenance, Avoidance, and Compensation
Jerome Wagner, Ph.D.
Once we establish our personality styles or paradigms to help us apprehend and navigate around the world, we can either keep them pliant, flexible, accommodating, and up to date; or we can rigidly maintain them, assimilating everything into them, and suffer what Joel Barker (1992) calls paradigm paralysis and George Kelly (1963) labeled hardening of the categories. There are many reasons why we might not want to change our personality paradigms once we have formed them. They've worked for us and we've become successful experts within their existing range. Outside the range of our paradigm, we're back to average. The more adept we become within our style and the more we become invested in it, the more we have to lose by changing it. Another reason for resisting change is that our identity has become intimately associated with our paradigm. We fear that, if we alter our paradigm, we will alter our sense of who we are and that will leave us feeling confused and lost. Holding onto our established identity and paradigm protects us from experiencing this existential anxiety. We maintain our paradigms because they have become familiar and familial to us. We become accustomed to having them around. They feel comfortable and familiarity breeds complacency. Staying true to our schemas keeps us loyal to our familys rules and roles. They give us a sense of belonging.

Efficiency, familiarity, comfort, and fit are some reasons why we hold onto our paradigms. How we hold onto our paradigms or schemas, even in the face of disconfirming evidence, requires some practice. For some insights into how our early schemas about our selves and the world are maintained, we can turn to the cognitive theories of Aaron Beck (1976) and one of his students, Jeffrey Young (1999), who has researched schema maintenance, schema avoidance, and schema compensation operations. SCHEMA MAINTENANCE We maintain our paradigms by selective attention to information that confirms our schemas and by selective inattention to information that disconfirms our schemas. For example, if you believe you are unlovable and people don't want to be with you, you will pay attention to any slights, signs of boredom, and/or signs of inattention on the part of others. Since you are hyper vigilant about this, you will eventually find what you are looking for. Or if you don't find it, you'll make it up and believe you see it. On the other hand, you will diminish the importance of any signs of caring, attention, and interest that come your way. You will say: "That doesn't count." Or you will interpret others' care to be manipulative or given under duress. Schemas can also be maintained by self defeating behaviors. If you believe people don't care about you, you will pick narcissistic individuals who really don't care about you; or you might keep looking for unavailable people; or you may fall into a pattern of abusive relationships. So we can use mental tricks to maintain our schemas and we can run faulty behavioral experiments finessing the data to confirm our hypotheses.

Here are what schema maintenance procedures look like when fanned out into the nine Enneagram styles. ONES maintain their schema that the world and all within it need to be improved by paying attention to what's wrong and what's missing and by paying little attention to the good that is already there. TWOS maintain their schema that they are helpers in a needy world by paying attention to the needs of others and by registering the approval and appreciation they receive for being helpful. THREES maintain their schema that they are the efficiency experts in a disorganized world by noticing the inefficient attitudes and behaviors of those around them, by not paying attention to the work done and successes achieved without them, and by recording the rungs of the ladder they climb and the kudos they receive thanks to their accomplishments. FOURS maintain their schema that they are aristocrats in exile, strangers in a strange land, tragically flawed, and imminently about to be abandoned, by noticing every lapse of attention shown them, every misunderstanding they receive, every flaw in themselves and every corresponding perfection in others, by comparing themselves with others and always coming up short, and by discounting others' acceptance and love. FIVES maintain their schema that the world is intrusive, withholding, and non-negotiable about both, by being overly perceptive of others' demands and expectations, by being hypersensitive to others denying their requests, by feeling powerless about negotiating what they want, and then withdrawing as a default maneuver. SIXES maintain their schema that the world is threatening and dangerous by looking for germs and enemies, imagining the

worst, and by not paying attention to the times, places, and people where and with whom they felt accepted, safe, and secure. SEVENS maintain their schema that they must have options and must always be "up" by focusing on the good times, remembering and anticipating pleasant events, moving from experience to experience so fleetingly that real satisfaction doesn't occur so they must compulsively move on to the next pleasurable happening. EIGHTS maintain their schema that the world is hostile and out to get them by noticing slights, abuses, and manipulations where there might not be any, and by downplaying or denying the sincere motivation of any affection or kindness shown them. NINES maintain their schema that the world is indifferent and they had best resign themselves to this fact by telling themselves "what's the difference," by noticing the futility of any of their personal initiatives and interventions, and by not paying attention to the changes they affected by their actions. SCHEMA AVOIDANCE Because schemas elicit such uncomfortable and painful thoughts and feelings as shame, guilt, fear, and anger when they are activated, we maintain our schemas by avoiding anything that would trigger their appearance. We can do this on a cognitive level through defense mechanisms that block the schemas from reaching consciousness. We repress them and go blank when asked to think about something that sets off the schema. Our intellect, imagination, and senses mysteriously fail us around this troubling material. For example if you ask TWOs what they need or ask THREEs where theyve failed, you are likely to get a blank expression or at best a quizzical look.

Not only can we block an awareness of our schemas, we can also block out any feelings that might accompany our schemas. We go emotionally numb as well as cognitively blank. This may involve a topical anesthesia. E.g., we might feel angry or happy or fearful; but we don't feel sad. Or we may experience a general anesthesia by attenuating and numbing all our feelings. We might have a low grade chronic depression. If you ask a FIVE what they are feeling right now, you find out what theyre thinking or you get a pause ranging from a few moments to a few days while they figure out what theyre feeling. Finally we can avoid our schemas on a behavioral level by refraining from activities that might activate our schema. If we are afraid of failing, we will avoid jobs, relationships, activities, etc. that might end up in failure. Maslow's "Jonah complex" fits here. When Yahweh asked Jonah to be his spokesperson, Jonah demurred, believing himself to be too incompetent and unworthy to tell the Ninevites anything. He spent a lot of time in the belly of a whale to avoid finding out whether he could mediate or not. Better to stay with what you know than risk some dire results from what you don't know. Agoraphobia (or spending time in the belly of a whale) would be an extreme instance of a behavioral avoidance to keep from activating schemas. If you ask ONEs or SIXes whether they were rebellious when they were teenagers, you are likely to get an "Of course not! response, since such behavior is hardly befitting responsible, conscientious, law-abiding boys and girls. Some schema avoidance maneuvers seen in the nine Enneagram paradigms are the following: ONES avoid slacking off, doing anything sloppily, or doing what they really want for fear of being criticized and feeling guilty. They avoid play and relaxation. This keeps their perfection schema in place.

TWOS avoid expressing their own needs for fear of being judged as selfish and then having their needs and themselves rejected. This keeps their helping schema in place. THREES avoid triggering their failure schema by eschewing any project that won't turn out successful. By avoiding their own agenda and feelings, they stay suited up in their image or role and thereby keep their achievement schema in place. FOURS avoid triggering their schema that they are flawed, unbefitting, and unacceptable by entering intimate relationships but then rejecting the other person before the other can accept or reject them. This keeps their troubled, special schema in place. FIVES avoid activating their schema that they are inadequate and have nothing to contribute by not committing to projects or relationships, by withdrawing, and by remaining silent. This keeps their loner schema locked in place SIXES avoid touching off their schemas of being cowards, unfaithful, heretical, or fragile, by avoiding their fears and their own convictions, and by staying close to authority figures and following the rules (if they are FEARFUL), or by staying away from authority figures and their beliefs, and impulsively acting against their fears instead of staying with their fears (if they are COUNTERFEARFUL). This keeps their fear schema in place. SEVENS avoid their schemas of being unhappy or limited by not committing to careers or persons that would tie them down, by avoiding painful situations and feelings, and by not sitting still for too long. This keeps their pleasure schema in place. EIGHTS avoid their schemas of being weak, vulnerable, and powerless by always staying on top and making sure they are never put in a one-down position. They avoid compassion and

tenderness and embrace justice and might. This keeps their power schema in place. NINES avoid activating their schema that they are unlovable and overlookable by not being passionate about themselves, their opinions, or their feelings. By not making a big deal out of their preferences or needs, they avoid ever being disappointed and hurt. This keeps their indifferent schema in place. SCHEMA COMPENSATION Finally we keep our paradigms or schemas in place by compensating for them, by doing the opposite of what we fear our schemas are really pointing to. So if we have a schema that believes we are a failure, we may cover this up and do the opposite by compulsively striving to be successful. Alfred Adler's theories about the "inferiority complex" and "superiority complex" were the precursors of what cognitive therapists refer to as schema compensation. For example Adler himself, embarrassed by his club foot and feeling inferior to his older brother, compensated for his inferiority feelings by becoming a successful theoretician and social activist. Through this process of reaction formation, we keep our underlying schema in place because it is never looked at, challenged, or experienced and so we are never able to disconfirm it because all our energy is going into proving its opposite and preventing the painful schema from surfacing. You know you are over compensating when someone hits the underlying vulnerable schema you are attempting to cover up and a strong emotional reaction ensues. You may feel angry, hurt, embarrassed, humiliated, sad, or fearful when your compensation button gets pressed.

Paradoxically our over-compensating tactics often bring about the very thing we fear or are trying to avoid. An example Young uses is the over compensation of narcissism for a basic sense and state of deprivation when younger. To compensate for feeling deprived when a youngster, the narcissist develops a sense of entitlement as an adult. I deserve this; I am owed this; and I shouldn't have to do anything to earn it. What the narcissist really wants is to be loved and have her needs met by others. However the narcissistic behavior and attitude is often exaggerated since it is an over compensation, and the inflated sense of importance and entitlement alienates others who then choose not to be involved with the narcissist. So the narcissistic individual is again left alone at the pool with only his image to comfort him. From the Enneagram perspective, each exaggerated personality style may be thought of as being an over compensation for some contrary underlying schema. Here is a summary of the over compensation tactics of each personality paradigm and how they can ironically elicit the very thing we fear. Paradigm One: Those who are exaggeratedly trying to be good and excellent at everything are compensating for underlying maladaptive beliefs that they are bad, unworthy, and imperfect. Being overly perfectionistic, pedantic, exacting, and critical frequently elicits criticism, anger, and avoidance from others. This confirms the belief the world is critical and not the way it should be. Paradigm Two:

Those who are exaggeratedly trying to be helpful and generous are compensating for underlying maladaptive schemas that they are selfish, undeserving of love and consideration, useless, and unimportant. Being too nurturing and smothering often elicits pushing-away behavior in others instead of the hoped for coming-closer behavior. This confirms the belief that getting one's own needs met is unacceptable and unlikely. Paradigm Three: Those who are exaggeratedly trying to achieve and be successful are compensating for underlying maladaptive beliefs that they are not acceptable in themselves; people don't like them; they are failures as human beings. An overly achieving, mechanical style frequently turns other people off and encourages them to interact with the persona or role instead of with the real person. This confirms the belief that performance, not genuineness, pays off. Paradigm Four: Those who are exaggeratedly trying to be special are compensating for underlying maladaptive schemas that they are nobody; they are flawed and ugly; and people don't want to be around them. An overly sensitive, refined, precious, entitled, easily misunderstood attitude generally brings about misunderstanding and distancing instead of empathy and connection. This confirms the maladaptive schema of being unlovable. Paradigm Five:

Those who are exaggeratedly trying to know while remaining anonymous are compensating for underlying maladaptive schemas that they are ignorant, insignificant underdogs unable to represent themselves. Keeping quiet and withdrawing provokes intruding and projecting behavior from others. Nature abhors a vacuum, so people move into the space vacated. Being silent can either be interpreted as: "She must be thinking something brilliant; or "He must have nothing to say. This confirms the belief that the world is intrusive or withholding and you have nothing to offer it. Paradigm Six: Those who are exaggeratedly trying to be loyal and dependent or rebellious and pseudo-independent are compensating for underlying maladaptive schemas that they are cowards; they are deserving of punishment for transgressing some rules; and they are living in a dangerous world. A suspicious paranoid attitude usually elicits hostile or plotting behavior from others. Thinking that people are talking behind your back usually gets them talking behind your back. This confirms the maladaptive schema the world is out to get you. Paradigm Seven: Those who are exaggeratedly trying to be happy and O.K. are compensating for underlying maladaptive beliefs that they are not O.K.; they are limited; they are about to be overrun by depression; they are boring or are imminently about to be bored. People who are compulsively cheerful and enthusiastic often elicit limiting and depressing responses from others as they attempt to "ground" or "shoot down" the high-flying optimist. This confirms the maladaptive fear that others are going to rain on your parade.

Paradigm Eight: Those who are exaggeratedly trying to be powerful and strong are compensating for maladaptive underlying schemas that they are weak and vulnerable and the world is a hostile place. An aggressive attitude and behavior can just as likely elicit aggressive behavior in others as the intended fearful behavior. The less strong frequently try to fight the more strong as a way of proving themselves. This helps confirm the belief that the world is hostile. Paradigm Nine: Those who are exaggeratedly trying to be settled are compensating for maladaptive underlying assumptions that they don't fit in; they are unwanted and neglected; they don't matter. You get what you ask for. If you don't ask for anything, you don't get anything. When you don't express your needs, other people assume you don't need anything and so don't offer you anything. People seem cold and uncaring and this confirms the belief the world is indifferent. We stay stuck in our style when, instead of examining our paradigms and adjusting them as circumstances require thereby giving us maximally effective outlooks and responses, we forget or deny were wearing lenses, refuse to get our prescriptions checked as needed, look at the world through a narrowed outmoded perspective and consequently respond in stereotypical behaviors. The Enneagram is a useful lens and schema checker offering us more varied and resourceful filters and pliant paradigms.

Barker, Joel. (1992). Future Edge. New York: Wm Morrow & Co. Beck, Aaron. (1976). Cognitive Therapy and the Emotional Disorders. New York: Meridian. Kelly, George. (1963). A Theory of Personality. New York: W.W. Norton & Co. Young, Jeffrey. (1999). Cognitive Therapy for Personality Disorders: a Schema-Focused Approach. Sarasota: Professional Resources Press. This article is taken from Jerry Wagners book in process on The Enneagram Perspective: Nine Personality Paradigms.

Karen Horney's Three Trends (Moving Towards, Against, Away From) and the Enneagram Styles The vision of the International Enneagram Association (IEA) is to be the hub of a vibrant international Enneagram community. Part of its mission is to sponsor open and constructive interaction among various schools of Enneagram thought. This would be the 21st century virtual version of 14th century Samarkand, the site of a great East-West trade route and a melting pot of cultures and ideas where Bennett (1973) believed the Enneagram emerged. With the intention of stimulating further dialogue and syntheses, this essay criss-crosses the theories of various Enneagram authors about how Karen Horneys description of three interpersonal trends might relate to the nine Enneagram styles. Karen Horney (1885-1952) is counted among the neopsychoanalytic theorists who, along with Erik Erickson, Erich Fromm and others, complemented the traditional psychoanalytic biological orientation with an emphasis on culture and interpersonal relationships. Horney thought that basic anxiety brought about by insecurities in childhood were more fundamental in character development than conflicts between instincts and society or intrapsychic conflicts among the id, ego, and superego. Children develop ways of coping along three dimensions: a child can move toward people (compliance), against them (aggression), or away from them (withdrawal). And conflicts, dear to the hearts of all psychoanalytic practitioners, can arise among these three tendencies. Horney writes about these three interpersonal trends in two of her books: Our Inner Conflicts (1945) and Neurosis and Human Growth (1950). These three maneuvers or gambits are complex human versions of the basic mechanisms of defense in the animal kingdom: submission, fight, and flight. Perhaps this instinctualsocial basis is what makes these trends so universal.

All three trends are available to us and healthy persons are able to move in any of these directions when needed. What usually happens, though, is that we become comfortable and used to one of the trends and so the other two become less accessible. Try, for example, to hit someone as you are moving to embrace them, or to move away from and reach out to them at the same time. Its also difficult to caress someone while you are punching them. Start moving backward and, while doing so, try hugging or slugging them. Not an easy negotiation. As with the Enneagram styles or the old Greek notion of hamartia, we can exaggerate a good thing or miss the mark. At the core of each trend is a healthy striving to cooperate with others, to assertively set boundaries, and to step back to be with ourselves in solitude. When we overdo these maneuvers, or when they become defensive and reactive instead of proactive, we become compliant (the self-effacing solution), aggressive (the selfexpansive solution), and detached (the resignation solution). Just as there is a high and low side to the Enneagram styles, so there is a healthy to distorted continuum with these three trends. As far as I know Karen Horney never met the Enneagram. However the Enneagram has been introduced to Karen Horney through Claudio Naranjo (Maitri, 2000) who used some of her constructs, such as the "idealized self-image", to conceptualize the structure of the Enneagram styles. Several Enneagram authors have also noted the similarities between Horneys three trends and the nine types. In their book The Enneagram: a Journey of Self Discovery (1984) Maria Beesing, Bob Nogosek, and Pat OLeary group the Enneagram styles according to Dependent Types (2,6,7), Aggressive Types (8,3,1), and Withdrawing Types (5,9,4). They draw from the class notes of Tad Dunne (one of the early students of Bob Ochs, S.J.) who theorized that "the nine different kinds of ego consciousness in the Enneagram result from the intersecting

of three distinct self concepts and three distinct preferred modes of behavior" (1984, p.100). The three distinct self concepts are: a) I am bigger than the world; b) I must adjust to the world; and c) I am smaller than the world. The three distinct modes of behavior would be Horneys a) moving against the world (aggressive behavior); b) moving towards the world (dependent behavior); and c) moving away from the world (withdrawing behavior). Intersecting the three self concepts and the three preferred modes of behavior creates the following graph:

I am bigger than the world I must adjust to the world I am smaller than the world aggressive 8 3 1 dependent 2 6 7 withdrawing

5 9 4 To paraphrase Beesing, Nogosek, and OLeary, the aggressive types (8,3,1) have the preferred mode of behavior of moving against people as a defense strategy to protect the self and ones worth as a person. Since Eights believe they are bigger than the world, they move with an instinct of power against people. Because Threes think they must adjust to the world, their aggressive behavior is channeled into achievement. Ones express their aggressive behavior by being critical of themselves and their surroundings. The dependent types (2,6,7) have a preferred behavior of moving toward people. They defend their self worth by becoming dependent on others through relationships. Since Twos have a self concept of being bigger than the world, they take the initiative in forming relationships. Since Sixes have a self concept that they must adjust to the world in order to be worthwhile, they place great importance on conforming to standards and laws already laid down. Sevens grew up feeling smaller than the world. For them to feel alive their environment needs to be full of good times and good cheer. The withdrawing types (5,9,4) have a preferred behavior of moving away from people to enhance their sense of personal worth. Since Fives grew up with a self concept of being bigger than the world, their withdrawal from people has as its purpose to become an intellectual overseer of everything. Nines withdraw from the world to adjust to it because it does not offer much to them in appreciation or love. Because Fours have grown up thinking they are smaller than the world, they express their

withdrawing behavior by feeling misunderstood and by rehearsing how to express themselves with originality and authenticity. Tad Dunne further theorizes that ego consciousness is characterized by a false sense of reality, what life is really about. Those whose ego consciousness says "I am bigger than life" (8,2,5) see real life as in the "inner order," as centered on themselves. Those saying "I must adjust to the world" (2,6,7) see real life as a harmony or integration between themselves and the outer world. Those saying "I am smaller than the world" see real life, or fulfillment, as centered outside themselves. To see how this dimension gets played out in the offensive, acceptive, and defensive types, read Chapter Three in The Enneagram: a Journey of Self Discovery (1984). Jerry Wagner, in his Enneagram Spectrum Training and Certification course, places Horneys three trends around the Enneagram circle in this same configuration, but theorizes from the inner dynamics or movements among the Enneagram types. The Enneagram indicates options for movement. For example, we can approach a situation from our own point of view, from our security point of view (the style going against the direction of the arrow), or from our stress point of view (the style going with the direction of the arrow). When we have one option, were stuck; when we have two options, we have a dilemma; when we have three options, we have a choice. According to the Enneagram, we have a natural connection to these three points and so choices are available to us. And with choice comes the possibility of change. Unfortunately change can be for better or for worse. So it is possible to shift to the high or low side of any Enneagram style (Wagner, 1996) and it is possible to move towards, against, or away from people and situations in a healthy or compulsive

manner, depending on whether we aim for the high side of each style or miss the mark and hit the low side. This arrangement gives each Enneagram style access to Horneys three trends through its core, security, and stress points.

1-7-4 (against, towards, away from)

2-4-8 (towards, away from, against)

3-6-9 (against, towards, away from)

4-1-2 (away from, against, towards)

5-8-7 (away from, against, towards)

6-9-3 (towards, away from, against)

7-5-1 (towards, away from, against)

8-2-5 (against, towards, away from)

9-3-6 (away from, against, towards) The Ones paradigm and style inclines them to move against people. On their high side, Ones have an idealistic vision of how people and situations could be and they desire to move reality from where it is to where it has the potential to be. Ones move against the status quo, the present state, to raise it to a status meliore, a better state. On their downside Ones can react angrily and resentfully when reality falls short of perfection. They are quick to spot flaws, criticize, and fix things up. Their defense mechanism is reaction formation, doing the opposite of what they are desirous of doing. For example, when they feel like resting, they recall how much more they have to improve and push on. When Ones shift to their relaxed or peak performance space Seven, they move towards people in an accepting, affirming, optimistic manner. They embrace reality as it is, allowing the chaff to grow up with the wheat. If they shift to the downside of the Seven style, they move towards pleasure and avoid pain, sometimes getting caught up in addictive behaviors. Or they appear overly friendly when reaction formation disguises their underlying anger and criticalness. When Ones shift to their stress point Four, they move away from people in an adaptive manner which allows them to reflect on their own feelings and desires vs getting caught up in fixing other peoples faults. In stepping back they can attend to their own inner journey while being present to others suffering without having to intervene. When Ones move away from others in a nonadaptive manner, they withdraw because they feel depressed at being flawed and misunderstood, or not appreciated for all they have attempted.

The Twos paradigm and style leads them to move towards other people and situations. They value relationship, connection, support, building up. Their natural tendency is to affirm, embrace, and approve. If they over do this tendency, they may become cloying, co-dependent, and crippling, ironically, the opposite of what their best self intends. They become overly solicitous and flattering. When Twos shift to their peak performance point Four, they move away from people, stepping back to allow others to stand on their own two feet. They also move inward to discover and develop their own creative sources and affirm their own agenda. When they shift to the downside of the Four, they move away from others because they feel hurt, misunderstood and underappreciated or because they feel special and priviledged because of all they have done for others. When Twos shift to their stress point Eight, they move against others, setting boundaries and limits, expressing their own needs, and making requests of others. They are clear about who they are and what they are responsible for and challenge others to accept responsibility for themselves. When Twos overshoot the mark, they move against others in an aggressive rather than an assertive manner, imposing their services on others, becoming critical and domineering. They may fantasize or seek revenge for feeling used and taken advantage of. Or they might push others away, claiming they dont need them. The Threes paradigm and style contains characteristics of moving against. Threes are competitive, proactive, go-getters. They get things done by aggressively working towards their goals. They tackle problems and overcome obstacles with gusto. On their downside, Threes can get caught up in Type-A behavior where they over-work themselves and their team, raising the bar of competition along with their blood pressure.

When Threes shift to their peak performance point Six, they move towards others and are as loyal and committed to people as they are to projects. They move past roles and personas and connect their real self with others selves. When they move to the downside of Six, they become overly obedient to management or authority or lose themselves in the project team. They become the "organizational person" instead of an organized person. When Threes shift to their stress point Nine, they move away from the situation. By slowing down and stepping back, they create room for their feelings and preferences to expand. They are more at peace and less driven. They give themselves the opportunity to be as well as do. When Threes shift to the downside of Nine, they grind to a halt and quit, resigning themselves to whatever happens. They move away from conflict and confrontation, neglecting themselves and what needs to be done. The Fours paradigm and style naturally moves them away from the action. Their attention moves inward towards their subjective responses to objective happenings. They reflect on their feelings and impressions of reality. If they move too far back, they may stand aloof from others for fear they will be misunderstood. Or their interest in their subjective impressions supercedes their allegiance to outer reality. Their fantasies compensate for their disappointing contact with others. When Fours shift to their peak performance point One, they move against the world, recognizing what needs to be done and assertively taking action. They become focused, persistent, dogged in their pursuit of what is right. If they go too much against others, they may become critical, overly righteous about their opinions and judgments, and arrogant in their idealism. When Fours shift to their stress point Two, they move towards others with empathy and genuine compassion. They transcend themselves and connect with others. Their giving flows from a

sense of inner fullness and creativity. When they go too far towards others, they become overly involved and lose their boundaries. They give in order to receive affirmation and approval. The Fives paradigm and style naturally inclines them to move away from people. They step back from the situation to take in the whole picture. Their sense of detachment lets things be. They prefer solitude, contemplative silence, and sacred space. When Fives move too far back, they can be distant and aloof. They step out of the game to be safe, then forget to step back in. They can become silent loners who are overly protective of their private space. When Fives shift to their peak performance point Eight, they move against people with assertive self-assurance and confidence. They apply their knowledge instead of storing it up. They disclose rather than conceal themselves. They say what they want and actively work towards their goals. When Fives swing past assertion into aggression, they express their anger in a clumsy, sometimes contemptuous way, putting others down or being cruel instead of confrontive. When Fives shift to their stress point Seven, they move towards people. They are gregarious, friendly, humorous, up-beat and outthere (in their Fivish way). They engage with others instead of disengaging. When Fives miss the mark and go to the downside of Seven, they seek pleasure and avoid pain. They would rather have fun than get something done (Eight). They avoid confrontation or anything that might provoke anger by smoothing things over or treating the situation lightly. The Sixes paradigm and style leads them to move towards others. They are gracious hosts and hostesses. There is a nurturing protecting manner to Sixes loyalty and bonding. When Sixes overdo this trend, they can become overly fawning or

conciliative. They want to appear friendly and non-threatening so others wont feel afraid of them or need to attack them. They want to be close to and on the side of authority. When Sixes shift to their peak performance point Nine, they move away from the situation. They step back and say "So what!" instead of being caught up in their fears which ask "What if?" They are relaxed and tolerant and trust that events will work out. When they miss the mark and go to the downside of the Nine style, they avoid conflict and move too far away from the fray. They detach and ruminate and doubt. When Sixes shift to their stress point Three, they move against the world. They express their agenda and take action to bring it about. They get organized, proactive and own their assertive energy instead of projecting their anger onto others and then experiencing the world as a hostile and dangerous place to live in. When Sixes miss the mark and go to the downside of the Three style, they become busy instead of efficient and productive. They are aggressive in the pursuit and defense of their beliefs and become ruthless adversaries instead of ecumenical neighbors (Nines). The Sevens paradigm and style naturally moves them towards others. Sevens are sociable and gregarious and enjoy being with people. They want to cheer people up and show others a good time. When they miss the mark and overdo their moving towards, they want all their encounters to be nice. They dont want any discomfort and dont want to be alone or bored. When Sevens shift to their peak performance point Five, they move away from others. In solitude and contemplation, they make their own what they have been ingesting. They practice what self psychology calls transmuting internalization. They internalize and do for themselves what their external environment has been doing for them. Sevens can detach vs greedily gobbling up the goodies

around them. When they move too far back, Sevens can get overly intellectual and distanced from their feelings and bodily-felt responses. They become remote instead of reflective. When Sevens shift to their stress point One, they move against the situation. They discriminate, critique, and chew on what they are offered rather than swallowing everything whole in a gluttonous way. Their idealism keeps them actively engaged in their endeavors even though the work may become painful. When Sevens move too far into aggression, they become overly critical and angry that their fun-filled plans arent working out. Their anger seeps out as sarcasm or contempt or they might become piqued that theyre not getting what they want when they want it. The Eights paradigm and style naturally leads them to move against people. Anger is the emotion that surfaces in them most readily. They challenge and confront the situation rather than back down from it. They speak their mind and make their wishes known. If they dont like whats happening, they do something about it. When Eights move beyond assertion to aggression, they can become intimidating and bullying. They get their way at others expense and can become vengeful and vindictive. When Eights shift to their peak performance point Two, they move towards others with compassion, understanding, and empathy. They use their energy to build others up instead of wear them down. They approach others with tenderness, grace, and charm. When Eights exaggerate their moving towards tendency and go to the downside of the Two, they may make others dependent on them so they will be beholden to them. They manipulate others weaknesses, using their strength to attach people to themselves. When Eights shift to their stress point Five, they move away from others. Moving to the high side of the Five, they are able to reflect before they act. The put a little lag between their impulse and its expression. They look before they leap. They are open to what is

instead of approaching situations with biases and preconceptions. When Eights shift to the downside of Five, they become too detached from their feelings and from others. They can become cruel and unsympathetic. Or they can turn their strength against themselves, punishing themselves and withdrawing if they think theyve been unjust. The Nines paradigm and style leads them to move away from a situation. They allow things to happen and events to unfold at their own pace. Nines have a laissez-faire, hands-off stance towards the world. If it isnt broke, dont fix it. When Nines overdo their moving away from tendency, they avoid conflict and confrontation and hope that benign neglect will solve their problems. They become too removed from the situation, put off doing what needs to be done, and conceal their real intentions often even from themselves. When Nines shift to their peak performance point Three, they move against the situation in a problem-focused, energetic, letsget-it-done fashion. They attack their problems rather than ignore them or lull them to sleep. They assertively express and work for what they want. When Nines overshoot the mark, they become overly busy and even compulsive. Their anger gets distracted into busy behavior or repetitious routines. They play competitive sports while their business plan lies dormant on their desk. When Nines shift to their stress point Six, they move towards others. Their loyalty and commitment to others may get them moving, doing for others what they might never do for themselves. They find the courage to support themselves and their agenda. When Nines overshoot the mark and shift to the downside of Six, they become overly concerned about what others think. They want to get others on their side even if it means selling out on themselves. They side with external authority which may move them farther away from their inner authority and guide. They lose themselves in relationships and teams.

To give ourselves a choice, then, we can ask three questions in each situation: 1. What would it look like if I approached, embraced, or leaned into the problem or situation? How can I close the gap? 2. What would it look like if I attacked, confronted, or challenged the problem or situation? How can I clear away the obstacles? 3. What would it look like if I stepped back or away from the problem or situation? How can I get some distance? Thomas Chou wrote an article "A Directional Theory of the Enneagram" in the January 2000 issue of the Enneagram Monthly where he described the surface and deep directions or motivations for the Enneagram types. He, too, follows the layout proposed by Dunne, Beesing-OLearyNogosek, and Wagner, but takes the dialogue between Horney and the Enneagram a layer deeper. For Chou, Horneys surface triad "does not describe the end goals of each type, but rather the tactics used to reach the end goals." The deep triad operates over a longer time frame and these deeper desires are more hidden in the subconscious. On the surface the aggressive types (8,1,3) are prone to the negative emotions of anger and competition which move against others. They pursue their long-term goals by directly changing the environment. The compliant types (2,7,6) are prone to the positive emotions of affection and appreciation which move toward others. Instead of pursuing their goals by confronting obstacles, they adapt to obstacles. The withdrawn types (5,4,9) are prone to internalizing their emotions, whether positive or negative, thus keeping them away from others. They pursue their goals

independently by minimizing direct interactions and finding the path of least resistance.

The Ones compulsion moves against others on the surface, but away from others underneath. While Ones may seem outwardly efficient and engaged, underneath they are thinking more about some ideal world that they are trying to create in the long term.

The Twos compulsion moves toward others on the surface, but against them underneath. Twos can be warm, helpful, and seductive on the outside, while harboring a hidden agenda and a strong will. They claim to be helping others while denying the aggressive motives underneath.

The Threes surface compulsion moves against people, while the underlying compulsion moves toward people. Threes seem pushy and competitive, while underneath they want the approval of others. They claim to be bold leaders while denying the deeper compulsion to follow the leadership of others.

The Fours surface and deep compulsions both move away from others. This makes Fours the most introspective and individualistic type. They are free from real-world constraints but also can be self-absorbed and alienated.

The Five moves away from others on the surface, but against others underneath where they are not as detached as they seem.

Their strong will leads them to want to be in control. Fives take ownership of the mental sphere.

The Sixs surface and deep compulsions both move toward others, making Sixes dependent on a stable external support. Wanting to trust the world, Sixes find the world treacherous and so develop defense techniques, such as skeptical thinking, seeking safety in groups, etc., against their own trusting nature.

The Seven embraces the world on the surface, but moves away from it underneath. While the Seven seems focused on enjoying the real world, their mind is actually attending to a fantasy of how things could be even better.

The Eight moves against others in both their surface and deep compulsions, making them the most aggressive type. Their will power, self-reliance, and possessive tendencies are evident to others. Their world of influence tends to be physical and worldly. Their doubly aggressive compulsion enables them to rise above obstacles to acquire a heroic stature.

The Nine moves away from others on the surface, but toward others underneath. Nines are caught in the conflict of wanting to detach from others while wanting to identify with them in the long term. They withdraw in non-threatening ways to allow themselves to reconnect later.

On this deeper level, Twos, Fives, and Eights are "power seekers" who move against others seeking a sense of control. When healthy, they empower others. Sevens, Fours, and Ones are "inspiration seekers" who move away from others to pursue their higher aspirations. When healthy, they inspire others. Threes, Sixes, and Nines are "approval seekers" who move toward others seeking to belong to the world. When healthy, they are approving. Don Riso and Russ Hudson (Personality Types, 1987, revised 1996) have a different way of thinking about Karen Horneys three trends and the Enneagram types. They expanded Horneys three solutions by "looking at how each type responds not just to people, but to other elements of the total environment, both outer and inner. Thus, aggressive types may assert themselves against nature or against their own fears, and withdrawn types may withdraw from activities as well as from people. Most importantly, we have seen that compliant types are not necessarily compliant to other people, but they are compliant to the dictates of their superego, which had its genesis in other people, mainly their parents." (1996, p. 443) With these modifications of Horneys theory, Riso and Hudson arrange her three trends according to the Enneagrams feeling, thinking, and instinctive triads. Each triad is composed of an aggressive type, a compliant type, and a withdrawn type. In the feeling triad: Twos are compliant to the superegos dictate to be always selfless and loving. Threes are aggressive in the pursuit of their goals and in their competition with others. Fours are withdrawn to protect their feelings and their fragile selfimage.

In the thinking triad: Fives are withdrawn, away from action, into the world of thought. Sixes are compliant to the superego dictate to do what is expected of them. Sevens are aggressive about engaging the environment and satisfying their appetites. In the instinctive triad: Eights are aggressive in asserting themselves against others and the environment. Nines are withdrawn so that others will not disturb their inner peacefulness. Ones are compliant to the ideals after which they strive. Riso and Hudson find some intimations of the Enneagram styles in Horneys clinical observations. In her descriptions of the aggressive types, she writes about the narcissistic, perfectionistic, and arrogant-vindictive types which would correspond to the Enneagram Three, Eight, and One. Riso and Hudson disagree with Horneys listing the perfectionistic type as aggressive. They see see the perfectionistic type as complying with its superego rather than aggrandizing its ego. They dont think Horney worked out the variations of the complying types, those who move towards others. They find elements of the Two, Six, and Nine in her descriptions, but think the Nine is a more withdrawing type. Within the withdrawing group, those who move away from people, Horney discusses the persistently resigned (Nine), the rebellious (Five), and the shallow-living (Four) types.

In their book Whats My Type? (1991), Kathy Hurley and Ted Donson consider Horneys three trends as "three different ways to approach lifes problems: by seeking expansive solutions in an aggressive way, by seeking temperate solutions in a dependent way, and by seeking enlightented solutions in a withdrawing way." (1991, p. 80). For Hurley and Donson, the aggressive numbers in the Enneagram are the Three, Seven, and Eight, whose goal is to restructure the world, to effect change. The outer world is their arena of competence because they know how to get things done. They set the rules and expect people and circumstances to fall in line. The aggressive stance makes Threes energetic projectoriented people, gives Sevens the energy to remain in constant motion as well as the evasive stubborness to get what they want out of life, and focuses Eights on accomplishment. The dependent numbers in the Enneagram are the Two, Six, and One. They are socially oriented people who feel, think, and act in relationship to others. They seek temperate solutions to lifes difficulties and make sure they process the reactions of people around them. They want to be thanked, reassured, and liked. The dependent stance allows Twos to look to other peoples reactions before determining their own response, increases the Sixes indecisiveness because they wait and see how others respond before they can decide what to do, and lets the world set the Ones agenda while Ones set the standards for how they will fulfill that agenda. The withdrawing numbers in the Enneagram are the Four, Five, and Nine. They are overprotective of themselves, seeking to be independent and to discover enlightened solutions to lifes problems. Wary of others, they rely on their own inner strength. They consider themselves to be the final judge in all matters that concern them. The withdrawing stance has Fours look within themselves for what they value in life, moves Fives deep inside

where they find the strength to carry them through life, and causes Nines to retreat within themselves to slumber in peace and inner tranquility. Janet Levine in her book The Enneagram Intelligences (1999) groups Horneys three trends according to the three centers: body, mental, and emotional, and labels them Defenders, Attachers, and Detachers. She describes these types as "three distinct modalities of being; three broad patterns of behavior; three primal, intuitive motivations driving how people operate in the world." (1999, p. 17) The Attachers, whose attention is outer-directed and who move toward people, make sense of, and operate in the world, through connection to people and relationships. Attachers live in an emotional environment. They want to know where they stand emotionally in relation to others. Their dominant issue is approval. They are motivated by how they feel about themselves, the feelings of others, and how they come across to others. Levine places Enneagram types Two, Three, and Four in this category. The attention of Detachers is inner-directed and they move away from people. They make sense of, and operate in, the world from inside their head. The mental context is the Detachers environment. Making sense of the world through mental processes and activities are their central preoccupations. Their mental activities include imagining, conceptualizing, fantasizing, analyzing, and synthesizing. They generate ideas, question ideas, and connect ideas. Points Five, Six, and Seven belong here. Levine describes the Defenders as having self-protective attention. They move (brush up) against people. They make sense of, and operate in, the world with an awareness of intrapersonal space and boundaries. The Defenders environment is a body-based context. Their mode of being is instinctual. They are aware of the boundaries around themselves and want to

establish their space. Operating out of gut feelings, they make their presence felt and establish their boundaries by being confrontational and combative, stubborn and passive-aggressive, or critical and judgmental. Points Eight, Nine, and One are found here. This has been a sampling of some authors about how Karen Horneys three trends might correlate with the Enneagram styles. Its meant to be illustrative, not exhaustive. Where do we go from here? More theories? While you certainly can never have enough paradigms, sooner or later hypotheses need to be checked against some evidence. Empiricism raises its scientific head. There is an inventory, the Horney-Coolidge Type Indicator, designed by Frederick Coolidge, Ph.D. to measure Horneys three types of people. It is a 57 item, three scale inventory, measured on a Likert scale ranging from hardly ever to nearly always fits me. It was normed on 630 people, 315 females and 315 males, with a median age of 21, ranging from 16 to 93 years. The internal scale reliabilities (alpha) and test-retest reliabilities range from .78 to .92, which is quite acceptable. Only a few validity studies are reported in the brief manual. A factor analysis of the three scales revealed a three factor solution in each of the scales. The Compliant Type scale showed factors of altruism, need for relationships, and self-abasement. The Aggessive Type scale revealed factors of malevolence, power, and strength. And the Detachment Type scale produced the factors of need for aloneness, avoidance, and self-sufficiency. Dr. Coolidge is very generously granting permission to duplicate his test for research purposes. He teaches in the psychology department of the University of Colorado and can be contacted at fcoolidg@mail.uccs.edu or at (719) 262-4146.

I havent used his instrument, yet, but having looked over the items, my reservation would be that his Compliant scale measures Twos, the Aggressive scale measures Eights, and the Detachment scale measures Fives, which are the Enneagram types that most clearly correspond to Horneys three trends in the first place. I wonder whether the other six Enneagram types would as surely endorse any of these trends as measured by this inventory. Nonetheless its a start down the yellow brick road of research. Perhaps the Enneagram community would like to participate in a research study that would extend across the various schools by taking the Horney-Coolidge Type Indicator, sending in the results of the inventory along with ones Enneagram type and strength of conviction about ones type to some hub where they can be collated and then disseminated back to the community. The central office of the IEA might be such a location or the Enneagram Monthly has expressed interest in coordinating research projects. Such a venture would be another venue besides international conferences for actualizing the vision and mission of the IEA. Send your comments or suggestions to Jerry Wagner at jwagner@luc.edu.

Beesing, Maria, Nogosek, R., OLeary, P. The Enneagram: a journey to self discovery. Denville, N.J.: Dimension Books, 1984.

Bennett, J.G. Gurdjieff: making a new world. New York: Harper and Row, Colophon Books, 1973.

Chou, Thomas. "A directional theory of the Enneagram. Enneagram Monthly (57), January 2000.

Coolidge, Frederick. Horney-Coolidge Type Indicator. Psychology Dept., P.O. Box 7150, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, CO 80933-7150.

Horney, Karen. Our inner conflicts. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1945.

Neurosis and human growth. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1950.

Hurley, Kathleen, & Donson, T. Whats my type? San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1991.

Levine, Janet. The Enneagram intelligences. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey, 1999.

Maitri, Susan. The Spiritual dimension of the enneagram. New York: Tarcher/Putnam, 2000.

Riso, Don, & Hudson, R. Personality types. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1987, 1996.

Wagner, Jerome. The Enneagram spectrum of personality styles: an introductory guide. Portland: Metamorphous Press, 1996.