Chronicles of the Daily Grind

I was browsing my notes and tests in the Enneagram which we took as a three-day seminar last summer. I still find it obscure as to how my “multifaceted” (a nicer way of saying “complex” or “difficult”) personality could be classified. In both tests I got high on both number 4 (the artist, romantic and individualist) and number 6 (the loyalist, Devil’s advocate, defender and doubter). Although the two types are not connected, I believe that I exhibit both their characteristics. In the end, I settled with number 6 as a personality type I am more comfortable with… but still, mindful of my behavior I drop into considering number 4 as an alternative personality type.

My goodness! Why do I have to be dictated by a number? After the enneagram seminar, we have already been classifying people with numbers.

“He’s a number one.”
“I am not at all surprised. He’s a number eight.”
“That dog is a number nine.”

If Victor Hugo’s Jean Valjean (marked and named as prisoner 24601 in Les Misarables) were real… he could have been killed us.

This is not about the enneagram fever. This is about how we have been fond of “labeling” people. “Labeling” and “Stereotyping” could lead to aggression.

It is amusing to suppose that the whole human population of the world (according to the International Programs Center, U.S. Bureau of the Census, the total population of the World, projected to 06/15/06 at 00:39 GMT (EST+5) is 6,522,229,536) could be classified to 9 personality types. That means there are about 724,692,170 like me under one type. What ever happened to that doctrine where every individual is unique and unrepeatable being? I know, of course, these are just classifications.

Am I raising this point to validate the intricacies of my complex personality? J I should know better.

Posted by brodiz on Thursday, June 15, 2006 at 9:21 AM | Permalink