Common Reactions to Feedback on Type

Sometimes the feedback we get on our Enneagram type doesn’t match how we see ourselves or what we were expecting. Being challenged about one’s view of oneself is bound to create inner disorientation and bring up many strong feelings like defensiveness, anger, or humiliation. While the feedback may not be correct, there’s a common series of objections to receiving feedback itself that have little to nothing to do with the intellectual content of the feedback. I’ve tried to summarize the most frequent ones here to minimize needing to repeat myself in hopes that these objections can “get out of the way” so that we can disagree on content.

“You can’t know anyone better than they know themselves.”

Yes. You’re correct. But knowing oneself and understanding the Enneagram are different things.

The Enneagram illuminates one’s psychological structure. That part of our psychology that can be categorized into impersonal, predictable structures and not one’s unique identity. People give away big and small signals of their type all the time, from their gestures, body language, and expressions, to style of dress, to where they direct their attention. After a long period of study, it’s possible to recognize these tells and what type they indicate with some degree of reliability and certainty.The Enneagram is not the place to look for mirroring of one’s identity, but take feedback as an opportunity to consider what this other person might be seeing without needing to adopt their point of view fully.


“Your definitions are too specific”

Yes. All 9 Types have very very specific definitions, qualities, behaviors, traits, motivations, and self-images. The more specific we can be, the more useful the Enneagram is.

“Your ideas and descriptions go against other teachers”

Yes and no. They go against the vast majority of “pop enneagram”, which is as full of bad information and misunderstanding as anything popular and widespread. Just because a lot of people agree on something doesn’t mean it’s correct.

 Especially when it comes to a topic that is so interesting but also requires so much study like the Enneagram, people inject all kinds of false associations and bad ideas that leak into the overall body of Enneagram information. This bad information leads to a whole lot of mistyping, and then mistyped people share what it's like to be their type and go on type panels, creating a feedback loop. The problem is not only that the information gets muddled. This confusion keeps the engagement with the Enneagram extremely shallow. Seeing one’s correct type means having to confront and work through a great deal that the personality doesn’t want to see in itself. Being mistyped further keeps one from seeing the very things that the Enneagram is meant to illuminate.

I draw a great deal on Riso and Hudson’s work in correlating object relations with the Enneagram. This is a very mainstream and commonly accepted perspective on the Enneagram from some of the most respected teachers in the field. It’s my opinion that to go deep with the Enneagram one must have a real working understanding of object relations in combination with the centers of intelligence. These two triads are key and begin to clarify the distinctions I make in my work and can help you make your own determination about what’s useful and accurate content or not.

“Nobody is a 4, everyone is a 9 or 6 according to you”

Not true, but despite how difficult it has been for even myself to believe, it does seem that there is an extremely imbalanced distribution of Enneagram Types. Type 9 followed by 6 do seem to be the most common types, even up to as much as 50% of the population or more. It doesn’t seem like that ought to be true, but it pans out. If this is the case, then wouldn’t getting very clear on what the dynamics of these types are be very important and interesting? It does make sense that attachment (9, 6, 3) would be a more common strategy than frustration (1, 4, 7) or rejection (5, 8, 2).

“You’re gatekeeping.”

I can’t actually gatekeep anything Enneagram. By having my perspective, the only thing I’m gatekeeping/withholding is my validation of your point of view.

“You’re gaslighting me.”

No, I’m not trying to confuse you, and I don’t want anything from you except for you to not spread misinformation and further confusion. My aim is to direct you to greater mental clarity and insight, either about yourself, the Enneagram, or both. The premise of the Enneagram is that our self-knowledge and our perceptions are unreliable. Thankfully, the Enneagram provides distinctions, perceptual tools, and methods for gaining greater judgement and more reliable discernment.

“But I relate to Type X…”

The reason the Enneagram is useful is because we do not know ourselves. The Enneagram helps us see the very facets of ourselves that our ego resists making conscious. This means that our self-perception is incomplete and very often quite far from reality. “Relating”, therefore, is not a useful or reliable way to determine one’s type. So you may relate a great deal to a certain type, but that doesn’t mean that type is representative of your psychological structure.
We are prone to “relate” more to Types that represent qualities we value or desire in ourselves. Many people “relate” to Type 8 because they value strength. Many people “relate” to Type 5 because they value their own intellect, etc.
This point is reinforced by how poor much Enneagram information there is, meaning that the picture we are feeling we relate to isn’t even reflective of the type it’s supposed to represent. Additionally, everything in the Enneagram occurs in triads, meaning that anything you can say about one type, you could say about two others. Naturally, you will relate to several types in different ways.
When we first learn the Enneagram, we’re likely to quickly form a picture of what each type must be like, but more often than not, these pictures aren’t accurate. For example, because of the uneven distribution of the types and because of theories like Tri-fixation, one might assume an acquaintance is a good representative of a certain type, when that type might only be one of that person’s fixes. These first impression associations are very strong and very hard to unlearn. We might think we relate to a type, but we are only relating to the first impression.
A reliable understanding of the Enneagram involves 1) comprehending the theory, 2) accurate and impartial self-observation in three centers, and 3) accurately applying our comprehension of the Enneagram to our self-observations. One has to be able to “see” the psychological activity of the type in action, within one’s own direct experience and psyche. It takes a lot of time and refinement to see with accuracy.

“Who are you to say what my type is?”

I typically don’t tell people what type they are, but I often tell people if the thing they’re claiming is reflective of a certain type, like a quote or celebrity or a description, actually isn’t. I believe that with enough experience, one can be reasonably solid about whether an innocuous form of content is reflective of one type or another’s point of view. Because each Enneagram Type can be understood as being made up of several overlapping triads (Body, Heart, and Mind, Object Relations, Horneavians, Harmonics, etc), it is possible to assess when something is biased in favor of one or more of these triads.

In the case I outright say what I think your type is, it’s usually in the face of one of these accusations, and therefore I’m bringing up the type to direct attention to what factors could be contributing to mistyping or defensiveness around one’s type being challenged.
Either way, you can judge the merit of my arguments and qualifications or dismiss me. If you’re accurately typed, my opinion won’t change your type.


“You just want to be the only 4.”

It would be refreshing if there was more genuine 4-related content out there, so by making the distinctions I make, I’m actually hoping for Type 4 “stuff” to actually relate to Type 4 and not be mixed up with other types, just as I want other types to be fully understood for what they are. I have typed a number of 4s but they generally go the individual interview route or are recommended to me by a friend/family member and not going a material submission route.
I do not care about being a 4 and don’t feel pride in being a 4. I do not care about being the only 4 or keeping 4s rare. I don’t particularly like other 4s.
Being a 4, it’s pretty easy for me to spot common behaviors in contrast to expressions of attachment. Would I be another type if I could choose? Probably not, because I’m pretty biased in terms of the 4 perspective. But I think when most people are in touch with what their type is really all about, they might want to be different than they are but not a different type.

“You take the Enneagram too seriously”

Yes. Absolutely.

“This is all a marketing ploy to get people to buy your services.”

If that’s true, it is the most unsuccessful marketing ploy in history. While I offer typing sessions, I don’t think anyone has come to me or my content from being vocal about these distinctions. Further, I am affiliated with, but make no money from Enneagrammer.com or their typing services. I’m not on their typing team.

“You’re a jerk/condescending/narcissist/bad person”

Sure, if it makes you feel better. I can’t imagine defending myself against the accusation of narcissism will convince anyone, and I don’t really care if anything thinks that about me. I’m interested in putting forward an accurate Enneagram.

A common way of resisting or not dealing with the disorientating feelings of re-evaluating one’s type and self-image is to project malice onto the person who offered the challenge. It’s also common to get away from disagreement over intellectual content by redirecting away from information to conduct or tone. I tend to state my observations and opinions plainly, because I find cushioning them isn’t actually polite or considerate, it’s just leaving a kind of option to disregard. I don’t think it’s rude to not do that, but some people, especially of certain types, have more difficulty holding onto their positions in the face of disagreement and may experience an opinion offered without “breathing room” to be rude or mean. Some types hold an assumption that we all ought to be “meeting each other halfway” and that validation is not only expected, it’s the morally correct thing to do. When someone doesn’t leave room for ambiguity, it can feel harsh or mean. That’s not my intention, I just appreciate directness and a lack of ambiguity.

“You’re arrogant/smug/I don’t like your tone.”

That’s more than fair. My style is not for everyone. It resonates with some people, and others it turns off. One of the pitfalls of the popularization of the Enneagram is people using the Enneagram to validate themselves rather than to see through their personalities. Self-validation is fine and necessary at certain stages, but my hope is to provide material for people who want more than that. 

My approach to the Enneagram begins with making what I believe to be the most accurate and useful observations about the types and how the personality works, which means making distinctions that can make people feel they aren’t the type they believe themselves to be or can trigger emotions around feeling some kind of acknowledgment is being “withheld”. This is not my intention, but because of the entanglements of some people’s personalities, it does mean I hold a boundary against trying to sooth reactions to the material. Sometimes that boundary means being playful, using humor, and debate, which doesn’t always translate well. My perspective isn’t for everyone, but my interest is in attracting people whose interest in the Enneagram is rooted more strongly in seeing through their patterns than it is using the Enneagram for mirroring and validation.

A common counter-argument is that a different delivery might make the information more palpable for a wider audience, and maybe that’s true, but I haven’t found a way to do that without diluting the content.

Finally, while inner work and spirituality are central for me, I do not wish to present myself as different from how I am in all walks of life. My personal experience has been far too many teachers of inner work learn to adopt a false teacherly persona. It’s up to you to decide if “walk my talk” or not, but I do not wish to confuse anyone with a special affect.

“You’re wrong.”

Definitely possible.

With all of that out of the way, I’m always open and interested in further discussion or dropping the conversation entirely.