Social 1(SO1)

Anger in the Social Sphere

Ironic thing that happens when you mix the Anger of the E1 with the instinct of adaptation, you get a character whose main characteristic is non-adaptability. These people have difficulty of going along with social customs and behavior, as they believe their stance is superior than that of the public and expect others to match their perfect standards, they project their perfection onto the social sphere. Rather than going with the flow of what is happening, they try to impose what they think should be happening, they have rigid ideas about how both they and others should behave socially. Anger here is half-hidden, it doesn't turn into warmth like in the SP1 or is "explosive" like that of the SX1, here it morphs into coldness, a cooler stance that expects you to follow it, the anger only leaks when their ideals are not conformed to.

Ichazo titled SO1 "Inadaptability", it was a representation of someone who has difficulty going along with social customs and behavior, feeling a superiority over others which then resulted in the apparent inadaptability. Naranjo describes the assertiveness of anger in this subtype as anger that is supported by intellectual and moral superiority, which requires a corresponding effort to excel, justified through a concealment of desire.

Trait Structure

Coldness

A trait of this character is coldness, an extreme coldness not to feel his "fallibility".
At least, this is how he appears in the social sphere, with an elegantly restrained way of presenting himself, of showing himself, of feeling socially acceptable, because he does not see his own limit, which, according to him, would make him the object of an intolerable judgment. This makes SO1 a maladaptive subject who lives on the edge.

This attitude aims to put the other in difficulties and lower their self-esteem. In this way, a person who feels incapable, guilty, irrational, will be a much easier obstacle to overcome, compared to the goal of doing things in the only correct way possible.

Antonio: for me coldness is also a way of distancing myself from the person I don't like, who for some reason I don't like or who I feel invasive, or even in the case of co-workers who secretly don't follow my instructions, or maybe someone who wants to dominate me... Then I stiffen, maybe lower my gaze, pretend it doesn't affect me and, finally, I avoid contact and try to get rid of the presence of someone who bothers me. At other times, however, I release my anger. Often, therefore, coldness for me and for other SO1 is a way of reacting to discomfort in the relationship. Other times I get "cold" due to shyness, today less and less. I close myself off and withdraw so that others don't discover my worthlessness, but inside me there is an emotional turmoil that doesn't shine. SO1 Shyness is also the result of a form of shame. In me, it is also the aspect of a fragility that manifested itself as a child through the redness of the face, in ordinary life situations and even through minor events. In these cases, the dominant feeling for me was a feeling of inferiority.

Distance

Michele: Another characteristic is distance, which is functional for maintaining a feeling of superiority over others. The fact that they feel superior (intellectually, as a capacity for reasoning, as a view of life's situations), does not favor the approximation of others to SO1 (whom they may consider unworthy of esteem, uninteresting, incapable or stupid).

Superiority

Antonio: The feeling of superiority is the belief that he's right, the idea that he has some kind of natural connection to the truth. Being sure that his position is always that of reason (and that the facts always prove it) leads him to develop a sense of separation from others, whom he can never see as equal to him. I would add that SO1's superior attitude is demonstrated rather than experienced. If he wants to win or prove that he is right, even when he comes to understand that this is not the case, SO1 insists with his arguments and even climbs into mirrors to find reasons to support what he says, going beyond the data of reality, and all this has a very deep reason. If I'm not right, if I'm wrong, I fail. The world discovers that I am incapable and useless, which is a bit like dying. All this contributes to the ills of the world by not allowing forms of agreement or balance that allow for a more harmonious social life.

Imperturbability

Michele: Imperturbability implies that those who are superior do not cower. Even in dialectical difficulty, proving yourself right is always within reach. It is only a matter of waiting for the facts to prove it and for the dialectical confrontation to lead to this result. Therefore, emotional tantrums are neither necessary nor conceivable to convince or seduce others.

Antonio: I have never felt unperturbed and when I show myself as such I put on a mask. I easily fall into emotional attacks and get angry when my reasons are not acknowledged or when I feel hurt or "mistreated." I don't have the patience to wait for the facts to prove me right. In discussions I get hot and passionate and try to prove, even by force, that the other person is wrong or not right. I consider these characteristics an aspect of my "asociality".

Intellect

Michele: SO1 avoids the outburst of anger through intellect, a tool that allows him to prevail over others in terms of "always being right." It's the way he found to avoid showing the visceral anger part, which is not socially acceptable. Moreover, on the basis of the "logic of the intellect," he can convince others that he is always right.

Antonio: The intellect is also very present in me. At the same time, the rational capacities and reasons I want to present can also be "shouted", so that the other hears what I say and does not devalue it or "talk over" me. So, my intellectuality is closely linked to emotions, especially those of anger. As a child, in my powerlessness to assert my reasons, I was sometimes overwhelmed by an internal tremor and the urge to cry. This was especially true in intimate relationships and friendships, but not in formal situations. I soon learned to enter the reaction training mechanism that protectively led me to consent, perhaps by smiling, even if I had a different point of view and wanted something else. but only up to a point. Today, I'm more likely to let go of smiles and condescension and indulge in outbursts of anger that can later lead to feelings of guilt and worry about rejection.

Harshness

Michele: In several situations, SO1 expresses itself relentlessly. He does this, for example, when dealing with a person he considers "stupid". Faced with such a person, his dialectic becomes so clear that he can literally destroy anyone with words. Thus, he does with dialectics what he would never have the courage to do through physical violence.

Antonio: As far as I'm concerned, I can express myself very harshly and ruthlessly with people who I consider having done me or are doing me harm. What I say is not entirely unfounded, but it can be very strong and devaluing for the recipient. It's a kind of ability I have to block the other person with words. This only happens to me with people who I feel are threatening me, who are maybe undermining my territory or not acknowledging my authority. In general, this extremely direct and incisive communication, although it has positive purposes, can cause fear or discomfort in the other person. I take as a general example a form of interaction theorized in Eric Bernel's psychological games. In general, a game leads to an abrupt and negative interruption of the relationship and ends with the conviction on the part of the character E1, but also others, that "you're not okay, I'm okay". Basically, "I'm fine" if I win, if I win. This gives him strength and a fictitious energy, an illusion of power that he doesn't really recognize in himself.

Repression

Michele: No situation, no guide, no group, and no person is perfect enough for SO1 to feel fully part of them or, in any case, in tune with them. There is always something wrong and something that needs to be changed, modified or corrected. This leads to a perpetual situation of disharmony in dealing with people.

Antonio: The E1 maladjustment is the result of a constant search for something more and something different, which reaches the point of not allowing oneself to live a satisfying life and, consequently, neither do others. We always seek the best: what already exists, what nature and the world offer, is not enough. It is a false need, that of the perfectionist who wants to change and transform people and things into something else, preventing himself from a quiet acceptance. It is an obsessive demand to improve oneself and others, losing sight of the possibility of enjoying the richness of what already exists in the here and now. The consequence is that SO1 always feels, illusorily, projected towards a better future.

Michele: I respect the way in which Social E1 contributes to the construction of social evil, we are inspired by what Claudio Naranjo wrote in his book El enneagram de la sociedade, where he argues that the social decadence of the character E1 in our society is represented by the aspect of repression.

This is a repression that does not take the form of physical violence, but rather the devaluation of the other. The E1's aptitude for perfectionism and his demand for the world to adapt to his vision of reality, produces as an enormous social evil the impoverishment of others and the discouragement of taking initiative. Instead of encouraging, supporting and accompanying others, it has taken on a more mature and fulfilled expression, the actions of E1 are directed towards the achievement of its objectives, thereby excluding the creative enthusiasm of others, perhaps because they only express in an inadequate way in its unique vision of things.

Marisa: The repression of the social begins and is particularly harmful in the private sphere, that is, with children and in the family or in intimate relationships, where it takes the form of "moral violence", either because it is directed at those who cannot defend themselves (children), or because it is directed at those who love us and are therefore more defenseless against us than against strangers. In these cases, it seems to me that we not only inhibit the creativity of others, but also prevent their freedom to be as they are, because, by devaluing them, we do not accept them.
This, on the one hand, blocks the conscious growth of the other, and on the other hand, it generates a violent anger that does not always find the opportunity to express itself, for the reasons explained above and for the particular hidden form of our violence, disguised as suggestions.

Antonio: For me, another way of contributing to the evils of the world is the deep conviction that it is up to me to fix everything and complete the unfinished, which feeds the idea that I cannot trust anyone and that in the end I will have to solve everything myself. This attitude leads me to always demand more from myself and to an obsession with doing everything better and better, without ever being satisfied. It is a search for perfectionism that then also weighs on others, in fact it induces those around me not to do it or not to do it very well, because in the end I will always be the one who will fix and correct everything.

Dualism

A strong dualism is present in the desire to perfect social things: "Do I do this? Or is it better to do that?" The source of perfectionism is conflict. Ostensibly, the Social E1 appears to have self-confidence, but in reality, its appearance of security allows it to cover up its discomfort, which comes from its attachment to Enneatype 6, which feeds its uncertainty, its difficulty of choice, and a subtle, fearful fear. it is his and tacit, as Claudio Naranjo proposed as the background of E1, and which translates into the attitude: "Am I doing it right or am I doing it wrong?"

Hidden Rebellion

If he does not rebel openly, it is because he is afraid of the risks he may take. In any case, his rebellion, although not clearly expressed, is quite evident in the positions he adopts, often contrary to those of others that he usually holds firmly. In my case, as a teenager, I began to rebel against my parents and the social model they passed on to me and I dedicated myself to studies and jobs completely different from what they wanted.

Obsession

The E1's obsession is different from that of the E6. Obsessive thinking in E1 does not engage in rituals or occupying the mind with ideas. It is a way to keep the mind busy, at the same time intellectually and creatively, even with dedication, to deal with complicated situations in which it is difficult to make sense. Its purpose is to capture the tangle and solve it. He gets into trouble to get through hardships and prove to himself and others how capable he is. Sherlock Holmes, who possesses this subtype, constantly says that he is unique in the world for his abilities and tends toward perfectionism. I also sometimes pride myself on being someone who knows their profession deeply, although I don't feel as confident as Holmes. And like Sherlock, when I "solve a case," I don't claim any recognition. The E1 needs coolness and lucidity. I remember an episode in which Holmes criticizes Watson for putting romantic elements in the story about Jefferson Hope. Even if they existed, he says, they should be eliminated because they take away the scientific nature of research, which is like an exact science, like a theorem. Social E1 (but also conservation) tends to cool your emotions and, in doing so, limits your potential.

Fixation for correction in the expression

The "clear and distinct ideas", according to Descartes' expression. They must be expressed in equally clear texts, without ambiguity, without arousing subjectivities. Speaking had to be, as a friend joked, "exact, correct, perfect". This strict nominalism has accompanied me throughout my life, and although it often gives greater rigidity to my expressions, it has also given me the pleasure of immersing myself in etymology and appreciating the art of writing, even that of poetry which, with its feet tied to the meaning of words, with their cadence and singular syntax, reach that to which the heart points, but that it is not in them. The staging that accompanies these considerations is a slow walk and talk, with a barely disguised aristocratic air.
I understand as a consequence of this rigid attachment to precision the difficulty I have felt in changing registers with agility in my social interactions. For example, moving from formality to mischief, picking up a few jokes in the middle of a "serious" conversation seemed to require an effort that seemed like a natural gesture to others. This often made me feel inadequate, socially awkward.

Overcoming, Permanent Correction

Overcoming is a gesture that everyone is obliged to perform continuously, especially in the face of adversity. Overcoming laziness, discouragement, anger and spontaneity. In my case, it is an overcoming of the sublime, the highest. An upward flight that finds idealized justifications (idealization shared by others, thus achieving their approval). Thus, the social E1 achieves a favorable way of being in the world.
Social E1 is also characterized by an attitude of permanent correction. In my case, this is based on the intimate conviction that one cannot simply be as one is, but rather overcome or adapt: that is, it is a just and necessary intervention that must be carried out by those who know, who can see.
Often, in contexts of action, I seem to notice variables that others don't appreciate. The art of pointing them out for improvement is what makes the difference between repressing and stimulating improvement.

Existential decisions

Inadaptability is organized around decisions like: if things go like this and I don't like them, I'll do them my way. Even when I need help, it's best not to lean on others; surely I will not receive what I need and in the end I will have to fend for myself. I have to strive and strive to achieve it. I will be strong, so I can face life and overcome my limits and my inability. Neither fever nor disease will stop me, I will always be standing. I will not disturb, and so they will love me. I will strive to deserve, so they will recognize me and I will be able to have the right to live in this world...

P. literally states: “I take care of myself and I don't let myself be taken care of. I take care of everything that concerns me, especially the difficult things. Since I need but it is difficult to be satisfied, I will fend for myself. I will be strong, good, bright, perfect. I will be like my father and the opposite of my mother.” For others, the paternal and maternal roles are reversed, but the final decisions substantially do not change.

Perfectionism

Inadaptability foresees a constant effort and commitment to do things well; this becomes an unrealizable pretension: to be perfect. So, you need to do things better and better and you are never satisfied with what you get. This attitude produces a state of constant tension that prevents you from relaxing and enjoying the results. It quickly departs for another adventure or another obligation to fulfill. Whoever walks this path is supported by a crazy and irrational idea: “Only if I am perfect will I be loved,” says B. The challenge with yourself is that “you have to arrive trusting only in your own ability and so others will admire me”.

Demand

The claim to be perfect needs an executive instrument. How do I get perfection? Demanding, demanding. Even torture. With sacrifice and using only my means. The goal is to improve, improve and improve. I will show those parents, sometimes both, sometimes above all the father, but also the mother, what I am capable of. It is a kind of rescue that the child wants, and today the adult: prisoner of his own history, unconsciously pursues an impossible end of perfection. Develop a special eye to discover the error, the stain. Commitment and demand have the objective of giving a good image of oneself.

The defensive system

The social E1, like the other subtypes, takes as a basis of its defensive systems above all the reactive formation. Suppressing experiences is not enough. It transforms them. He wants to improve. He believes that what he thinks or feels does not have enough value, or that it will not be well received, and then transforms it into something else. The social subtype, in particular, expresses little of its anger — unless it has sexual as its second subtype — and replaces it with more socially acceptable forms. Their attitudes and expressions tend towards seriousness and circumspection. It shows controlled coldness, a subtle smile and a certain kind of gentleness, until it reaches an aristocratic superiority that can lead to indignation. It tends to show calm and control. In the activities that produce the greatest tension, anger becomes a diffuse demand that leads to the obsessive desire to improve and correct, especially the other, but also himself. Anger hides, remains in the background and becomes a push to improve, a pretension and control of oneself and others. Thus, the goal becomes seen as nobler: to do things better, to be better. For P., the result of all this is disastrous. Not being programmed to have children, she manages to have one through artificial insemination. He is mother and father at the same time. It does not recognize the effective father sufficient capacity. He tries very hard; he wants to offer the child as much as possible. "I raised him as I was raised." The father wanted her to be perfect; she wants her son to be perfect. "You don't cry, you don't laugh, you don't feel afraid." The result is that the child self-produces small cuts and suffers; it does not tolerate all this presence and perfection.

Other characteristics

The social subtype is the most intellectual of the three subtypes of E1 and is often a great reasoner. Claudio Naranjo affirms: “Hides rage with imperturbability”. And then he adds: “Aristocratic, elegant, circumspect. Underneath is the fire.”

Several of the people involved in this research are dedicated to volunteering and helping. B. is dedicated to the defense of workers, although with an administrative role. He works in a union he considers “moderate.” Everyone wants to be recognized for their own value, which is lost as soon as a criticism arrives or they realize that they have been wrong. There is a tendency to have the norm in mind: “the true norm is the one I believe in.”

Claudio Naranjo's Social 1 Description

E1 Social - Inadaptability/Superiority

The character one social is very different from the other subtypes of E1. This is the result of a characteristic designated by Oscar Ichazo — from whom I learned — as inadaptability. For a long time I preferred to simply use the word rigidity in describing this character, referring to something akin to a kind of schoolteacher mentality, and also to what Wilhelm Reich saw when he spoke of an "aristocratic character"; it's just that the word rigidity describes a behavioral style or a specific personality trait rather than a need or passion. Therefore, it remained pending for me to formulate a neurotic need from which the rigid character would become understandable.

In this search, the case of a woman who, in addition to being an intellectual and cultured woman who was part of the philosophy department of a university, spoke with a marked American Midwest accent, was very illuminating. And it was striking that she, despite having moved to California a long time ago, she continued with this strong accent that is usually associated with people with little educational level. Being a social character, it could be said that her inadaptability was expressed in it; but how to understand such a behavioral trait from an underlying motivation?

In this case, since people tend to adapt their way of speaking to that of the environment, it was worth asking: why did she care so little about it? It was enough for him to ask me that it became clear to me that the answer lay in his general attitude of feeling right. He acted as if the thought “my form is correct” implied that it is up to others to adapt. And this was also noticeable in the fact that he made language errors that did not correspond to his cultural level, which could be easily understood as a result of that attitude of believing himself to be someone exemplary.

However, the feeling that I am right does not constitute a motivation, or a passion. And if we want to explain the contrast between a conservational one - who, as we shall see, is the perfectionist proper, in view of his chronic awareness of his imperfections, which leads him to perfect himself -, and the social one - who already feels perfect and therefore it can make serious mistakes—, we must go back to the need for superiority, by virtue of which the social adopt the position of impeccable and perfect. The social one has a real passion for feeling “I'm right, and you're wrong”; and this, in turn, implies a certain power over others, because when he can make others feel that they are wrong. It is as if he were saying, “If you are wrong, then I have more right than you to dominate the situation.”

It is a great technique, that of dominating through making others feel that they are wrong, and it can be understood as an alternative to the dominance that the sexual one establishes through mere assertiveness in taking possession and feeling with it. corresponding right. But, since these characters feel above all an implicit moral superiority, it is useful to point out the great difference between morality and moralism: what is immoral in E1, apparently so upright and honorable, lies precisely in that its apparent morality is nothing more than moralism.