Note that the numbers only serve as markers but do not suggest any sort of qualitative order among the types. In other words, each type possesses different but equal strengths and weaknesses; none is better than another.

Another important thing to remember is that type descriptions are only guidelines that can point out possible strengths, weaknesses, goals, and fears of groups of people. Just as we can sometimes determine general beliefs and attitudes in populations based on polls, historical background, and demographics, typing is an attempt to uncover general groups of people whose share common elements due to the ways they absorb and process information. Typing should not be exclusive but directive: its purpose is not to pigeonhole behaviors exclusively to a particular group but direct the process of understanding and communication between people who are more different than they might realize. It is not meant to control relationships but to facilitate them.

___The Three Triads____________

Just as Jung's theories break down into a 4 x 2 grid (four functions, expressed either as extroverted or introverted), the enneagram breaks down into a 3 x 3 grid. It contains three triads -- thinking, feeling, and instinctive -- each comprised of three of the nine types.

The types included in each triad are not arbitrary but either overexpress, underexpress, or remain out of touch with that particular triad strength. For example, in the Thinking triad, Fives generally overexpress thinking, continuously entering more complex and yet isolated thoughts; Sixes generally need constant reassurance from outside sources as to the validity of their thinking; and Sevens often leave their thoughts incomplete, moving sporadically from task to task.

The types in each triad have similar problems but express them differently. For example, the Feeling triad types generally have problems with identity and hostility -- they all try to project a false image that seems more "acceptable" than their own. (Twos reject their own needs in order to appear more loving and giving. Threes figure out what other people view as successful and then try to fulfill that image. And not identifying well with others, Fours create an idealized self-image that separates them from others and often does not mesh with the realities of daily life.) All three can become hostile to others and themselves when this desired image is strained.

Breaking down people into nine types seems simplistic indeed, which leads to the influences of the wings. Due to the way the personalities are arranged, people are generally colored to some degree by one of the two adjoining personality types, which is deemed the wing. (As an example, Eights can have either a Seven or a Nine wing, and the notation for an Eight with a Nine wing would be 8w9.)

Some enneagram theories suggest that a valid wing can be chosen from any one of the remaining eight types. However, because personality is not a haphazard but structured formation, Riso points out that by doing so, one often creates contradictions in the personality type itself, and believes that the adjoining wing method seems to give more consistent results. He claims to have done the most purposed study of the wing types and has published substantial descriptions of these "additional" eighteen types.

___The Levels of Development_______________

In 1977, Riso detailed various levels of (un)healthiness in each of the nine types. These are the dynamic levels refered to earlier. Most likely in keeping with the 3 x 3 symmetry, Riso described nine levels in each type -- the first three healthy, the second three average, and the last three unhealthy (with Level 1 being the most actualized and Level 9 being the most destructive). These levels are debatable, of course, but the overall concept of the same personality type manifesting differently depending on its healthiness seems to be a good one.

Importantly, Riso considers personality a progressive animal. First, we are all born with certain dispositions. Second, our lifetimes are spent either actualizing the raw materials of our personalities, or letting those same raw materials push us towards extreme behaviors resulting in personal disintegration. When properly balanced and controlled, each type's characteristics can become unique strengths; when catered to and allowed to control the personality, each set of characteristics becomes personally and sometimes socially destructive.

An important part of the levels of development is the assumption that each type has unique desires and unique fears, and that these desires/fears are expressed different at each level of development. For example, at Level 1, the Four (Individualist) is self-actualized and lets go of her identification of a particular self-image; her basic fear when at this level is simply that she might not have an identity or personal significance. However, already at Level 2, these basic desires/fears shift slightly: the Four desires to find herself and her signficance, and fears losing touch with her inner state or sense of self. Way down at Level 6, the desires/fears get more basic and self-centered, while less ambitious and other-centered: the Four simply desires absolute freedom to find herself, and fears that she is ruining her life or wasting opportunities.

Some interesting aspects of the levels of development is, in Riso's framework, individuals automatically shift focus from selfishness to other-centeredness as they progress upwards. Realizing that they have worth, Fours can start to contribute to others. Realizing that they are competent, Fives move out of their inner thought world to impact the outer. Realizing that they don't always need to be in control, Eights can be powerful motivational leaders. And so it goes. In order to actualize, each type must stop trying to meet its own needs -- a motivation that usually just reinforces the type's weaknesses -- and focus instead on the outer community. Most other theories don't speculate on the "love" aspect of psychological self-actualization -- that, as a type gets healthier, its focus automatically moves away from itself towards others, and that to focus on others rather than the self enables this health to accure. In a large sense, despite objections otherwise, Riso's enneagram theory has strong Christian overtones.

___Theory Comparisons_______________

Riso has done some extensive comparison among other personality theories including Horner, Jung, and Freud. His enneagram analysis seems to combine the same data used by these other psychologists, just in different fashions, rather than being based on the typical whimsy of most other enneagram titles.

Horner suggested that three neurotic solutions to stress exist: Moving away from people, moving against people, or moving towards people. In this terminology, Fours, Fives, and Nines withdraw; Threes, Sevens, and Eights are aggressive; and Twos, Sixes, and Ones are compliant.

Jung's eight types (four functions, delineated as introverted or extroverted) can be generally associated with eight out of the nine enneagram types. (For example, Riso equates Ones with Jung's extroverted thinking type.) Only the Three has no Jung corellary, but Riso claims that bits of the Three type are scattered throughout Jung's eight-type description. Jung's theories are fairly accurate, which gives credibility to Riso's claims; however, some types do not match as well as Riso suggests.

Using the DSM-IV standards of mental disorders, Riso is able to predict to some degree which personalities are most likely to suffer which sort of mental imbalances. For example, from a logical standpoint, the hyperactive and never-completing enthusiastic seems prone to histronic and manic/depressive disorders.

Freud's concepts of the oral, anal, and phallic stages -- coupled with the categories of receptive, retentive, and expulsive -- present nine different outcomes that seem applicable to attributes of the nine enneagram types.

Riso also associates various parental influences and relationships with the development of each personality, similar to Freud. In his presentation, however, Riso almost seems to suggest that personality is developed through environmental factors alone -- in the child's reaction to its parent(s) -- which is a bit too simplistic for any theory. (And which also contradicts Riso's Christian heritage, which suggests that people are unique -- and not blank slates -- from birth.)

The Freudian id, ego, and superego can also be correlated to the three triads of instinct, feeling, and thinking, as well as assigned to the three types in each triad in order to describe the Freudian problems each type might face.

___Accusations & Incriminations______________

As mentioned, the ennegram has come under a lot of fire in the Roman Catholic church due to its popularity and overuse/misuse. Riso's exploration of enneagrams seems the most internally consistent, and he admits that his system is a conceptual construct and not yet properly validated. However, popular writers such as Helen Palmer have mixed New Age-ism with what ennegram theory exists, creating a bastardization of Riso's more authentic psychological angle. Catholics and Jesuits alike have tried to oversimplify personality, making the nine types extremely rigid and confining. Creating or overdeveloping relationships where there might be none is the first sign of a philosophy/science gone awry.

In many ways, however, the worst Christian problem with the enneagram would seem to be not its flaws as a personality system but that it seems to sometimes supplant Christ's role in the life of the believer. Riso tries to reinforce God's role in the process, using theory simply as a means to explore differences in personality and pinpoint strengths and weaknesses. But according to Christian belief, when the enneagram -- or psychology or other power -- becomes the driving force behind a person's salvation and actualization, then it can be deemed an idol. In Christianity, anything supplanting God in the believer's life is idolatry.

In light of this, blaming all of one's problems on the enneagram is a way of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Directed by God, the enneagram can be a useful tool. Not directed by God, it can be dangerous and misleading to Christians.

While illiterate accusations abound, one well-written Christian complaint to the enneagram ("Tell Me Who I Am, O Enneagram," written by Mitchell Pacwa) appeared in the Christian Research Journal (1991). Macwa provides many valuable historical details about the enneagram. Although his scientific and religious objections seem to fluctuate in usefulness and focus on the flawed (rather than the perfected) enneagram, he still offers some valuable insight and recommendations. Some of my quick comments are as follows (the negatives first):

Pacwa sometimes focuses on tangent elements that distract from his stronger points. For example, he draws an analogy between the enneagram principle of dividing "seven into one" & "three into one" and occult practices. Of course, other religions fiddle with numbers as well (Christianity speaks of God as being "three in one," for example.) In the Christian mindset, the problem with the occult is not that it toys with numerical relationships or finds underlying numerical structure in reality, but that it promotes an alternate form of salvation, mostly through natural means. Pacwa loses a little focus here.

Pacwa sometimes overstates his case, such as when he claims that the integration/disintegration concept is false because no study has yet been done on it. At best, he can say that it yet remains to be seen via formal proof. In actuality, the conceptual proof (according to Riso, at least) is that the type in the direction of integration possesses a strength that the current type is lacking. This at least makes logical sense: A person becomes mature and well-rounded, and they will often do this in the direction of integration.

Pacwa loses his focus when he complains that the mind (thinking), heart (feeling), and instinct triads are an arbitrary breakdown of types. However, such notions have generally appeared in all serious psychological type theories. Even the guy off the street can see truth in the fact that a person can be comprised of mental, emotional, and physical elements. From the Christian viewpoint, the only real problem with this breakdown is then suggesting (as some enneagram authors do) that putting these three elements into alignment is a method of spiritual perfection. In other words, it treats "spirit" as the summation of the three quantifiable personal triads. Although being well-rounded mentally, emotionally, and physically is definitely an asset, and although the spirit seems to be affected by such things, Christianity suggests that perfection of spirit comes from God and not from human effort.

Pacwa proposes that the occultic ties of some early founders of the enneagram (Ichazo and Gurdkieff) makes the whole enneagram suspect. Christians should be on guard when studying the theory, holding to what is true and abandoning what is not; however, it does not mean that the theory holds no truth whatsoever. As a similar example, the fact that many scientists are atheists does not prevent them from developing accurate scientific theory or creating benevolent technology that Christians believe to be useful. The enneagram is not necessarily fradulent in some of its claims.

Pacwa complains about "type" resulting from parental factors in childhood -- i.e., the child's perception of the parents' interactions with him. I find Riso's support of this environmental source to be a major flaw in his enneagram theory, since it discounts the strong biological roots of a child's personality. While personality can be largely affected by the environment, even a child's reactions to environmental stimuli can differ depending on the child's inherent makeup. (As a personal example, my two sons are exact opposites in personality and yet were born close together. Even with the minor variables that inevitably occur between the environments of these two siblings, personality differences appeared too quickly and extremely to be so dependent solely on environmental factors.) Many Christians believe from different scripture references that people are unique before birth, rather than a blank slate differentiated by experiences after birth.