Type Combinations

The Issues with Enneagram-Jung Comparison

Author: Pincare

Contact: https://www.personality-database.com/user/134581

There has been a particularly interesting disagreement among typology communities since time immemorial:

• Are there impossible type combinations?

We will be discussing this issue with a particular focus on Enneagram and Jungian typology type combinations. Firstly, there is a difference between these two theories that has been disregarded by everyone who has discussed this in the past:

• Jungian theory states that type is not static; it changes over the course of one's life | source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIM0aajRKsw

• Enneagram theory states that type is determined at birth and never changes

The specifics of the second bullet point are discussed predominantly by Sandra Maitri, but a general overview is that from birth everyone is more inclined towards one particular Holy Idea and therefore attaches themselves to a dominant Enneatype. This is static and unchanging. A.H. Almaas also writes on this approach to the Holy Ideas through "The Diamond Approach." In order to avoid my source being "just trust me bro," here:

"Each of us, then, is attuned to reality through one particular angle...even if we were fully enlightened, fully free from the obscurations of our conditioning, we would still be sensitive to reality in accordance with the Holy Idea of our point on the enneagram, and we would experience and manifest more of the enlightened affective state—called the virtue—of that point than of any other. Our type, awakened or asleep, remains the same." - 'The Spiritual Dimension of the Enneagram' by Sandra Maitri

Assuming that there are impossible type combinations, there must be a correlation between these two theories. However, if Jungian typology allows for types to change and Enneagram absolutely does not, this "correlation" is an absurd assumption with no basis. Let us take an example to illustrate a problem with this assumption:

• INTP 5 ---> INTJ 5

Following this example, it is reasonable to assume that 5 can remain the dominant Enneatype since that Enneatype is compatible with both INTP and INTJ. However, if we take another example:

• INTP 5 ---> ESFJ 5

This is where the problem arises since, clearly, ESFJ does not work very well in theory with E5.

What this leaves is two possibilities:

• Enneagram and Jungian theory cannot be compared

• Only slight differences in how a type in Jungian typology can change are allowed in theory, such as INTP ---> INTJ

Possibility 2 is peculiar, however. What this means is that one individual might be able to alternate between 3-4 different Jungian types repeatedly throughout their life. It would be theoretically impossible to go beyond that, and this is decided purely by their Enneatype (a separate typological structure entirely). Additionally, if Enneagram and Jungian typology have this major difference in the first place, why is it assumed that the characteristics are comparable? It should be self-evident that, considering the two theories have such an extreme difference in the first place, it is highly unlikely they share much in common at all. It is illogical and unreasonable to compare the two. If Enneagram doesn't allow types to change and Jungian typology does, why is it safe to assume they measure the same things? It isn't, and that assumption is demonstrably false.

Additionally, it is worth noting that Enneagram theory states that everyone functions as a separate type from their dominant type at some point. "Enneatype" is more accurately phrased as "dominant Enneatype," since, in actuality, everyone has characteristics of all 9 types. There is always a dominant Enneatype, however. This allows for a lot of variation and further proves that any Jungian type can be compatible with any Enneagram type. In fact, it would make more sense for your Jungian type to be contradictory to the characteristics of your dominant Enneatype for this reason; where would the characteristics come from otherwise? Everyone functions as all 9 Enneatypes from time to time. This would, of course, indicate a different Jungian type from the one that corresponds the best with your Enneatype. These two entirely different rules complement the two theories very well. Source:

"...while we are each born sensitive to one particular Holy Idea and therefore predisposed to one ennea-type, we each contain all nine types. Because of this, most people can readily understand and relate to the dynamics of all of the types. All of the types, then, are present within us, but one of them is most pronounced, and the fundamental delusion about the nature of reality that corresponds to it forms the core of our structure." - 'The Spiritual Dimension of the Enneagram' by Sandra Maitri

Naranjo's descriptions are phrased purely archetypically, especially considering his writings are largely based in symbolism and are often ambiguous. It should be clear that not everyone functions as he states all the time. For example, E8 is not always engrossed entirely in the moment. They are not a different species that does not ever reflect on regrets or anything long-term, for one cannot survive that way. Archetypically they are depicted as though they never do this, or at least it is something that is very rare. Once someone reaches adulthood, however, it is exceptionally absurd to attempt to fathom that such a large portion of the population--theoretically 1/9--isn't capable of long-term survival purely because of their typology in one system. Naranjo's descriptions comparing mental illness to certain Enneatypes does not imply that every Enneatype has that particular mental illness, so why would Naranjo's descriptions correlating present-moment action with certain Enneatypes apply to everyone who shares that type? This is unreasonable to assume. Additionally, if someone is only able to alternate between 3-4 types over the course of their life, what if they change from INTP to INTJ to ENTJ to ESTJ? Why wouldn't they now be able to change to ESFJ? Because their original type prohibits it? What application does their original type have to now, the moment they change from ESTJ to ESFJ? Nothing. It has absolutely nothing to do with it. There is no reason to assume it does. Assuming the INTP's dominant Enneatype is 5, it has to still be 5, meaning that that individual is now an ESFJ 5 and there is absolutely no logical reason to assume they aren't. Furthermore, how are we to determine what their "original Jungian type" was? This must be quite important if it single-handedly determines what they are able to be in the future, and since absolutely no theorist--including Carl Jung, and even Myers-Briggs--have stated what this utterly ambiguous term means, there is no reason to assume we know what it means. Is it the type at 5 years of age? Birth? How are we to determine what an infant's typology is? No one knows.

It has now been theoretically demonstrated that possibility 1 is more likely by a large margin; any combination between Jungian typology and Enneagram should theoretically function perfectly fine.