Enneagram Theory

by Fergus Duniho

Introduction

This page attempts to give a fairly comprehensive theory on what the Enneagram is, why it is not arbitrary, how it is scientifically based, how Enneagram types and subtypes are related to each other, and what the four main triads are that make up each type. The focus is on theory, not on individual descriptions of each type. Its purpose is to improve overall understanding of the Enneagram. Some parts of this theory are based on the work of Riso & Hudson, Hurley & Dobson, and Thomas Chou. But the overall theory is my own.

Human Personality & The Triune Brain

The Enneagram of personality types begins with the recognition that human beings have three main kinds of intelligence. These are behavioral intelligence, emotional intelligence, and mental intelligence, and these three kinds of intelligence are due mainly to the three evolutionary levels of the brain. The oldest part of the brain is the reptilian brain, which is not all that different from the brains of reptiles. This brain is concerned mainly with behavioral intelligence. The second oldest brain is the paleo-mammalian brain, which is common to mammals. This brain provides us with emotional intelligence. The newest brain is the cerebral cortex, which is common to humans and some higher mammals, but which is generally much more evolved in humans than in other animals. The cerebral cortex gives us our mental intelligence, which allows us to use language and think abstract thoughts, among other things.

Ideally, a person should rely on all three kinds of intelligence roughly equally, relying on whichever kind is most needed in the situation. But that rarely happens, and it takes lots of personal growth for a person to approach that point. What happens is that people get fixated on preferring a certain kind of intelligence over the others. Some prefer mental intelligence, some prefer emotional intelligence, and some prefer behavioral intelligence. Besides that, there are variations among the people who prefer each kind of intelligence. Some people focus predominantly on one kind of intelligence, and other people rely on a second kind of intelligence as an auxiliary, repressing the third kind of intelligence. Although personality difference are many and varied, this understanding of how people fixate on certain types of intelligence provides nine main divisions of human personality, and these nine divisions are the nine personality types of the Enneagram.

But before I start in on the Enneagram types, let me provide another way for visualizing how human personality varies. The human eye picks up color with separate receptors for red, green, and blue. Thus, any color visible to the human eye can be represented as a combination of red, green, and blue. Since there are three basic kinds of intelligence and three basic colors, color can be used to represent the wide variety of human personality. Let's use red for emotional intelligence, because emotions are associated with the heart, which is red, as well as with heat and warmth, which are associated with another red thing, fire. Let's use blue for mental intelligence, because it's the color of water, sky, and sometimes ice. It represents calmness and coldness, which are sometimes attributes of someone who is highly intellectual. Let's use green for behavioral intelligence, because it is most grounded in the body, and green plants are grounded in the earth. Also, reptiles are often green, and behavioral intelligence is mainly due to the reptilian brain. And remember that these colors are mnemonically chosen. There is no deep significance in the association between a color and a kind of intelligence.

By associating each kind of intelligence with its own primary color, many different variations in personality can be represented by colors. For example, my personality is sort of indigo. Other personalities may be mauve, maroon, red, cyan, pink, lavender, forest green, royal blue, aquamarine, etc. There are many different color words for different shades of color. Yet we still often rely on the standard color names without making fine distinctions between shade. We may use red to cover scarlet, maroon, burgundy, pink and other colors; blue to cover navy blue, royal blue, sky blue, etc.; and green to cover forest green, brownish green, emerald green, etc. And we use some common secondary color names, such as yellow, orange, violet, purple, aquamarine, and indigo.

As I mentioned, there are nine basic ways for a person to fixate on certain kinds of intelligence. Here is how we might use color names to identify these nine personality types. I have also included the number which the Enneagram uses as the label for each type.

Subtypes

As there are many different shades of colors, there are also many different variations of each of the nine basic personality types. One further division of the nine types is into eightteen subtypes. Each subtype is identified by its main type and the next type its closest to. The term wing is commonly used to identify subtypes. A subtype is described as a main type and a wing, as in I am a five with a four wing, abbreviated 5w4.

Some people have the mistaken idea that a type can have any other type for its wing, giving us a total of 9*8 or 72 different subtypes. This idea is based on a mistaken understanding of the nine types, which likens the nine types to a painter's palette rather than a spectrum. The nine types form a spectrum. They are not nine different ingredients that can go into making different personalities. Your type indicates where you are on the spectrum, and the only wings available to a type are its two neighbors. So, for example, you can be a 5w4, but you cannot be a 5w1. There are ways in which fives and ones can resemble each other. For example, both rely on emotional intelligence as an auxiliary. But one cannot be the wing of the other, for they are opposites in terms of how they prefer the three kinds of intelligence. Fives favor mental intelligence while repressing behavioral intelligence, and ones favor behavioral intelligence while repressing mental intelligence.

We could say there are as many subtypes as there are individual colors. But a map is useful by being less complicated than the terrain. For example, a road map will show you roads, towns, and selected places to stop, but it won't tell you about everything you will see in your travels. The Enneagram is like that. It is a map that helps us understand and do something with the vast complexity of human personality. It is not about putting people into boxes. It is about finding out where you are and where you should be going.

Look at the picture on your left. It isn't just a pretty Enneagram picture. It is specially designed to illustrate what I've been talking about. I created it by drawing a color wheel with a BlitzBASIC program and combining it with an Enneagram figure with UltimateFX. The color of each point in the original color wheel was determined by its distance from three different focal points. Distance from point 3 (120 degrees) determined the red part; distance from point 6 (240 degrees) determined the blue part; and distance from point 9 (360 degrees) determined the green part. The color wheel represents the full spectrum of human personality. Each person is fixated around some point in this spectrum. The Enneagram figure is a map lying on top of the spectrum. It helps give us bearings on where we are, and with its help we may move ourselves closer to the center of the spectrum, where the three kinds of intelligence are more balanced.

The Triads

Various Enneagram authors have divided the Enneagram types into various groups of three types each. Each set of groups is a triad that includes all the Enneagram types. All together there are four different triads, and there is a perfect symmetric fit between all four of these triads, such that they form a complete whole. With one exception, each triad centers around the balance points 3, 6, and 9. These are the three types on the triangle part of the Enneagram. Each group in the first triad, which has been written about by virtually all Enneagram authors, consists of a balance point and its closest neighbors. This triad identifies the center of intelligence that is most overused by a type. Each group in the second triad, which was discovered by Riso & Dobson, consists of a balance point and the type two types away from it on each side. For example, type 3 has types 1 and 5 in its group. Groups in the third triad consist of types that are three types apart on the Enneagram. Since the balance points are all three types apart, only one group in this triad has any balance points in it. The fourth group, which has been written about by both Riso & Hudson and Hurley & Dobson, consists of a balance point and the types four types away from it on each side. For example, 9 has 4 and 5 in its group. No more triads can be formed by increasing the distance between types. A distance of 5 groups together the same types as a distance of 4; a distance of 6 is equivalent to 3; 7 is equivalent to 2; and 8 is equivalent to 1. The beauty of these four triads is that each pair of types is found together in one and only one triadic group. This table shows which triadic group each pair of types belongs to.

The Primary Triad: The Hardest Working Center of Intelligence

This triad concerns the three centers of intelligence, which have been identified by many Enneagram authors, and which have regularly been given different names by each of them. Riso & Hudson call these the instinctive, feeling, and thinking triads. Richard Rohr calls them the gut, heart, and head. Hurley and Dobson call them the effective, affective, and theoretical centers. And Enneagram authors aren't the only ones to recognize these three centers of intelligence. Elaine de Beauport, who is not an Enneagram author, has described the same three centers of intelligence in her book The Three Faces of Mind. The terms she uses are behavioral intelligence, emotional intelligence, and mental intelligence. Although the various Enneagram authors have used good terms, I favor de Beauport's terms, because they are familiar and accurate, and I think they convey very well what is central about each type of intelligence. Besides this, "emotional intelligence" is already a widely known expression, thanks to the writing of Daniel Goleman. So these are the terms I will use.

Mental intelligence is what we commonly think of when we think of intelligence. For example, IQ, which is a measure of intellectual abilities, stands for intelligence quotient, not intellectual quotient. Recently, the author Daniel Goleman has been challenging the idea that intellect is the only kind of intelligence. He has written the book Emotional Intelligence, which describes various skills emotionally intelligent people have. Another kind of intelligence, which I've noticed my brother has in more abundance than I have, is behavioral intelligence. Behavioral intelligence is the ability to instinctively know the right thing to do and do it. One common use of behavioral intelligence is riding a bike. No one who knows how to ride a bike can transmit this knowledge to someone else. The best anyone can do is help a person find the knowledge of how to ride a bike for himself. My brother and I both know how to ride a bike, but he's the gold medal winning racer, and I'm not even a contender. Although this is partly because he is more physically fit, it also because he can instinctively handle a bike in a way I never could.

According to both de Beauport, Hurley and Dobson, Riso & Hudson, and others, each center of intelligence corresponds to an evolutionarily distinct part of the brain. Behavioral intelligence comes from the reptilian brain, which evolved first, emotional intelligence comes mainly from the limbic system, which evolved second, and mental intelligence comes from the neocortex, which evolved last. The human brain evolved mainly by adding new layers over what was already there. This is sort of like building Windows 3.1 on top of DOS. DOS is there in its original form, but Windows 3.1 adds new functionality to DOS. Also, DOS still got updated after Windows was created, and the reptilian brain and limbic system continued to evolve in humans and human ancestors. But the relationship of one part of the brain being layered over another still remained. So the human brain is made up of three brains whose relationship to each other is like the relationship between DOS and Windows.

The first to evolve was the reptilian brain. As the name indicates, this is the sort of brain common to reptiles. It gets them to do the things they need to do to survive, such as eat, sleep, hunt, and have sex. The reptilian brain is the primary center of behavioral intelligence in a human. In mammals, a new brain layer evolved, which is known as the paleo-mammalian brain. This new layer provided mammals with emotional intelligence. This was critical to the survival of mammals, because they gave birth to young who couldn't defend or take care of themselves right away. This emotional brain prompted them to take care of their young. It also allowed mammals to have social relationships with each other, allowing them to provide each other with mutual aid and protection. In the higher mammals, the neocortex, also known as the neo-mammalian brain, evolved. It probably evolved because it gave social mammals the ability to communicate with each other in more elaborate ways than mere expression of emotions allowed. Communication within a group of animals helps them aid each other's survival. This mental brain also gave mammals such survival advantages as strategy, inventiveness, adaptability, and the ability to learn and teach new skills. This last advantage allowed mammals to pass on language and culture in addition to their genes. This is seen, for example, in cats, who are not born knowing how to hunt mice but instead must learn the skill from other cats who teach them. And, of course, it is abundantly seen in human beings, who have a more advanced neocortex than other mammals.

According to many (possibly all) Enneagram authors, each person has a preferred center of intelligence. This is the most active center of intelligence in a person and normally the one that person relies on most. But this is different than saying that those in the mental group have higher IQs, that those in the emotional group have the highest EQs, or that those in the behavioral group are the best athletes. As Riso & Hudson point out, this triad concerns where a person's chief imbalance lies. This is the center of intelligence that gets overused the most. The mental types can have the hardest time quieting their minds, as they tend to think nonstop, whether or not it is intelligent thinking. The behavioral types may squirm, fidget, and act out more than other types, because they always want to be moving. And they are also more likely to get into fights, which isn't very intelligent. The emotional types are the most aware of their feelings, and they feel more than other types do. But this doesn't mean that their feelings are any more reliable than the feelings of other types. Emotional types have a greater tendency than other types to get melodramatic or hysterical. Furthermore, mental types are not automatically the same as Jung's thinking types, and emotional types are not automatically the same as Jung's feeling types. A person can sometimes be a mental type and a Jungian feeling type or an emotional type and a Jungian thinking type.

The Coping Styles Triad

This triad, also called the harmonic groups, was recently discovered by Riso & Hudson, who wrote about it in Wisdom of the Enneagram. Each group in the triad consists of a balance point and the type that is two types away from it on each side. It concerns how people defend themselves against bad things in their lives, such as loss or disappointment. Types in the positive outlook group try to remain happy and cheery. Types in the reactive group react strongly, often venting their feelings. Types in the competency group try to remain objective, sometimes repressing or analyzing unpleasant feelings.

The Hierarchical Triad

Unlike the other three triads, the groups in this triad do not center around balance points. This is because that would be a mathematical impossibility for types that are three types apart. The groups in this triad consist of types three types apart. One of these groups contains all three balance points, and the remaining groups have none.

As I understand this triad, it reflects how the preferred center of intelligence relates to the other two centers of intelligence. The preferred center is the most powerful center, but power is not the same as control. For example, the workers under capitalism have more power than the capitalists, but the capitalists control the power of the workers. There is a difference between who has the power and who controls the power. In the human personality, there is the same kind of distinction. Sometimes, the ruling center of intelligence is not the strongest center. It sets the agenda but gets a stronger center to do most of the work. In some people, there is no ruling center. And in some people, the ruling center and the strongest center are the same.

But what accounts for this? I believe there is a built-in rock-paper-scissors type of hierarchy between the three centers of intelligence. This is speculation, but it makes sense to me. As the limbic system and the neocortex evolved, each evolved the ability to override the brain it was built on top of. The limbic system could override the reptilian brain, and the neocortex could override the limbic system. This provided the brain with checks and balances, sort of like the three branches of the American government have. For example, when an animal's children were threatened, the limbic system could get an animal to risk its life for its children, overriding the reptilian brain's instinct for self-preservation. This proved useful to the genes, because the genes would be replicated when animals with the same genes looked out for each other. As Richard Dawkins has pointed out, survival of the fittest is about the fittest genes, not the fittest animals. The limbic system, by sometimes overriding the reptilian brain, got animals with similar genes to work together in groups, and this was good for the genes.

Likewise, it was beneficial to the genes for the neocortex to override the limbic system. While the limbic system motivated animals to look out for each other, the neocortex made it possible for animals (and particularly people) to coordinate their activities with great precision. And this would be possible only if the neocortex could override the limbic system. Humanity has become the most powerful species on earth in no small part because its neocortex can override the limbic system. However, it does not seem that the neocortex can directly override the reptilian brain. From an evolutionary perspective, this would be redundant. The neocortex can influence the reptilian brain through its influence on the limbic system.

Furthermore, as the most basic brain, the reptilian brain is dominant by default. It is no longer dominant over the limbic system, because it gave up it dominance to the limbic system. But it did not give up dominance to the neocortex. When the neocortex deals directly with the reptilian brain, the reptilian brain is dominant. The neocortex can rule over the reptilian brain only with the aid of the limbic system. Likewise, the limbic system can control the neocortex with help from the reptilian brain, and the reptilian brain can control the limbic system with help from the neocortex. In simple rock-paper-scissors terms, the mental intelligence of the neocortex is dominant over the emotional intelligence of the limbic system; the emotional intelligence of the limbic system is dominant over the behavioral intelligence of the reptilian brain; and the behavioral intelligence of the reptilian brain is dominant over the mental intelligence of the neocortex.

If no type of intelligence were any stronger than any other, then the three centers of intelligence would be in balance with each other. But the relative strength of each center changes things. In some people, the three centers of intelligence fall into a clear order of preference. One is most used, one is used second most, and one is used least. In these people, the dominant center is whichever of the two strongest centers is normally dominant over the other. For three types (2, 5, & 8), the dominant center is also the strongest center. For three other types (1, 4, & 7), the dominant center and the strongest center are different. This creates a dialectic in which the preferred center normally serves the agenda of the dominant center, but in which there is also a power struggle between the two centers. Instead of combining their powers toward a common goal, the dominant center tends to focus its power on controlling the stronger preferred center, and the preferred center has to act on its own. For the three other types (3, 6, & 9), one center is strongest, and the other two are of roughly equal strength. In these people, there is more mutual influence between the three centers, and no center is dominant.

This gives us three triadic groups based on the types of hierarchies between the three centers of intelligence. In the dominant group, the strongest center of intelligence is also dominant. This center of intelligence sets the agenda and relies primarily on itself. But because it is in charge, it can also rely on the secondary center to back it up. For type 2, emotional intelligence is dominant and strongest, and it is supported by behavioral intelligence. A 2 relies primarily on emotional intelligence and behavioral intelligence to boost his own self-image. For type 5, mental intelligence is dominant and strongest, and it is supported by emotional intelligence. A 5 relies primarily on mental and emotional intelligence to get by in the world. For type 8, behavioral intelligence is dominant and strongest, and it is supported by mental intelligence. An 8 relies primarily on behavioral and mental intelligence to get what he wants.

In the dialectical group, the second strongest center is dominant, and strongest center is subordinate to it.

This triad concerns how a person sees his place in the world. Those in the control group need to feel in control of their lives, and they are most comfortable at the top or outside of a hierarchy. 5s seek control over their lives through knowledge; 8s seek control over their lives through leadership and confrontation; 2s seek control over their lives by making themselves indispensible to others. Those in the harmony group need to feel that they are in harmony with the world. For the sake of harmony, they will more readily submit to outside authority than those in the control group. 3s seek harmony by winning the admiration of others; 6s seek harmony through group affiliation; and 9s seek harmony by preserving peace. Those in the ideals group submit themselves primarily to ideals. They will go along with outside authority if it conforms to and upholds their ideals, and they can become fierce enemies of outside authority when it goes against their ideals. 1s focus on moral ideals and can become very moralistic. 4s focus on their own personal ideals, often judging themselves harshly and longing for something better. 7s focus on utopian ideals about how the world could be made a better place.

This triad has its roots in the Object Relations theory of Klein and Winnicott. Melanie Klein was a student of Freud who observed different ways that children related to objects, and she maintained that these ways of relating to objects stayed with children in adulthood. There were three ways, and they were to focus on the danger of being rejected, to become attached to the object, and to become frustrated with the object. Those who normally focus on the danger of being rejected try to avoid rejection by staying in control of their lives. Those who normally become attached to objects wish to live in harmony with them. Those who normally feel frustrated with objects get frustrated because reality doesn't match up with their ideals.

By my best reckoning, the first people to apply Object Relations theory to the Enneagram were Hurley & Dobson in their book What's My Type?. They used their own terminology. They called it the Way of Life. The rejection group became the Way of Subjugation; the attachment group became the Way of Mediation; and the frustration group became the Way of Reduction.

More recently, Thomas Chou has written on the same triad, offering new terms and new insights. My own terms are based somewhat on his. He calls the rejection group control-seeking, the attachment group approval-seeking, and the frustation group inspiration-seeking. Chou's insight is that this triad is a long-term variation on Karen Horney's three-fold distinction between moving against, moving toward, and moving away from. He identifies three goals, which are control, approval, and inspiration. Seeking control is a way of moving against the world; seeking approval is a way of moving toward the world; seeking inspiration is a way of moving away from the world. Historically, this triad is based on the work of Melanie Klein, not Karen Horney, but the work of both women was based on the work of Freud, making it possible that both this triad and the next are based on similar themes. The main difference is that this triad is concerned with long-term agendas while the next is concerned with short-term strategies.

The Social Styles Triad

Each group in this fourth and last triad consists of a balance point and the two types four types away from it. This triad is based on a three-part distinction made by the Freudian psychologist Karen Horney. Both Riso & Hudson and Hurley & Dobson have written on this triad, and they are in agreement on which types belong to each group. I have adopted Riso & Hudson's terms, because I think they are most accurate. Riso & Hudson call these social styles, whereas Hurley & Dobson call them approaches to problem solving.

Thomas Chou has argued that types 7 and 1 should change places in these triads, and he prefers to call the compliant group the embracing group. Riso also notes in a footnote that Horney regarded her "perfectionistic" type, which corresponds to Enneagram 1, as aggressive, but that he disagrees with her. Overall, I am more persuaded by the explanations given by Riso and by Hurley & Dobson than by Chou. Riso understands compliant types to be compliant to their superegos, whereas Chou has argued that embracing types have more positive emotions that aggressive types. I believe that this idea confuses this triad with the coping styles triad, the data I've gathered doesn't support Chou's theory, and I disagree with Chou's opinion that compliance must be on the part of the whole self, not just the ego.

Also, Hurley & Dobson give an explanation of this triad which makes a lot of sense to me. Remember how the first triad concerned three centers of intelligence. This triad concerns those same three centers of intelligence, though in a different way. Groups in the first triad were based on which center of intelligence is preferred. Groups in this triad are based on which center of intelligence is repressed. Withdrawn types repress their behavioral intelligence; assertive types repress their emotional intelligence; and compliant types repress their mental intelligence. The balance points prefer and repress the same center of intelligence. 3s prefer and repress emotional intelligence; 6s prefer and repress mental intelligence; and 9s prefer and repress behavioral intelligence. The characteristics common to each group are due to the shortcomings that follow from repressing a certain center of intelligence. Assertive types (also called aggressive) give the least concern to other people's feelings; compliant types have the least confidence in their own intellectual abilities; and withdrawn types are the most distrustful of their ability to act spontaneously and know what to do.

One possible objection to this theory comes from Riso & Hudson, who emphasize that the preferred center is where our chief imbalance lies. This is not emphasized in Hurley & Dobson, but it is not inconsistent. It just means that the preferred center gets overused. Mental types have difficulty quieting their minds; emotional types are prone to emotional indulgence; and behavioral types have problems with aggression. If some types can prefer and repress the same center, repressing a center can't mean that it is underused. Instead, it seems to mean that it is the least trusted.

Putting Things Together

Although there are four triads, there is only one type at the intersection of any two triads. It might seem that there should really be 3^4, i.e. 72 types. It might seem that Enneagram types are merely based on four sets of three-way preferences, similar in nature to MBTI types, which are based on four sets of two-way preferences. But this is not how the triads should be understood. The conjunction of triadic preferences is not what makes a particular Enneagram type. Rather, the triads are a reflection of what does make the essential difference between Enneagram types, and this is the order in which a person favors the three kinds of intelligence. The first triad groups types according to a type's strongest center of intelligence. The second triad groups types according to a type's secondary center of intelligence (when there is one) or by which center is both preferred and repressed. According to Jane Carlton, the third triad divides types into those whose primary intelligence is well-supported by the secondary intelligence, those whose primary intelligence is equally supported by both remaining centers of intelligence, and those whose primary intelligence is not well-supported by the secondary intelligence. Essentially, emotional intelligence is best supported by behavioral intelligence; mental intelligence is best supported by emotional intelligence; and behavioral intelligence is best supported by mental intelligence. The fourth triad groups types according to a type's repressed center of intelligence.

Further Reading

• The Enneagram and the Triune Brain by Jane Carlton
• A Directional Theory of the Enneagram by Thomas Chou
• Body Types, Part 1 by Peter O'Hanrahan
• Steps to a Unified Model of the Enneagramby Fabien and Patricia Chabreuil
• The Enneagram: Key to Opening the Heart by Kathy Hurley and Ted Dobson