|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 25, 2020 20:09:03 GMT -5
Jordan Peterson sp/SO 6w5(7w6)-1w9(2w1)-3w4(4w5)
There are more compelling interviews in posts below but this one dispels a few typing misconceptions about one of the biggest celebrities to emerge from the YouTube commentariat in the past few years
Jordan Peterson has a strong One fix second but doesn't lead with One; he's very obviously a Six to anyone who knows Enneagram well and looks at him at all carefully. He doesn't display 'gut knowing' leading; Ones don't micromanage and do minutiae-based what if second-guessing post mortems on their own public behavior. He is very clearly attachment lead and that attachment is head-centered,, Passion Doubt, talking style 'setting limits' 6.
Peterson isn't 4-fixed although he does have 3 "deep in the Four space with movement into the Hole". The toehold on the 4/5 line on his image fix plus the 5 wing on the lead type and the 1w9 immanent or emergent gut, also with integration of 4, together are what give the impression of a possible 4w5 fix. But to ascribe him a 4 fix is to deny the range of what 3 is capable of. Peterson's heart/image is ultimately competency/production based; not envy-based fixated on maintaining a romanticized unique personal identity.
Peterson is synflow and sx last. The same factors that make people want to ascribe him a 4 fix make them want to amp up his sx. A different factor--the 'Prussian' nature of strong social 6 with 1 make others want to give him so/sp. But again, sp 6 is itslelf concerned with 'other people's survival'.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 25, 2020 20:50:31 GMT -5
Much of the cursory perception of 1 lead in Peterson comes from the hypervigilant, extremely defensive 6 stance he adopted in all but the most friendly interviews due to the negative coverage he received in the press and the way he was misrepresented. The stance was rigid and controlled. sp first 'guard up' amplifies the Oneishness as well. You see all this in the interview with Cathy Newman discussed above.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 27, 2020 9:24:07 GMT -5
Jordan Peterson did a regular Q&A live stream answering questions from his paying YouTube audience, which he stopped when he got sick and is just resuming. This is an old one; his energy has been pretty consistent in all the ones I've seen and it's very different from his standard interview presence. Type Six basic orientation is hierarchical with flip flops of top dog/bottom dog (or 'complete collaboration mode). In his Q&A's Peterson seems to adopt a 'bottom dog' position out of deference to a sort of all the little people who make me what I am stance. This is very typical of Six lead and is something you really won't find in a One lead. One is an adjudicator; its position is going to be either top down (judge pronouncing the verdict) or oblique to the hierarchical structure--judgement's swordplay, cutting around the edges to find the verdict. This position can be quite aloof but it won't be bottom dog. One doesn't show its throat.
These Q&A's are quite long but it only takes a cursory look to see Peterson leads with Six not One. Also, I would call this Peterson's TiNe mode; he's almost certainly TeNi but uses all functions and in this mode he almost seems Se PolR. Another thing to note here is a kind of 'emptiness', a (non)presence 6 (and 3) line to 9. This emptiness is always latent in a Six; it really doesn't exist in a One lead--One being 'full of conviction, even if only the conviction that judgement is pending.'.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 27, 2020 9:56:29 GMT -5
This presence in his live stream Q&A's is a very far cry from the video that launched him to fame and notoriety when he took his stance against enforced use of pronouns in Canadian bill C16. But even here you see the flip flops-top dog, bottom dog; you see the doubt.
Granted, you also see the inherent paradox of gut type 1 "Righteous Wrath", which Eli Jaxon-Bear calls "driving with the breaks on'. Because 'wrath' cannot be 'righteous', because it's 'bad' to get angry. So the E1 fixation is something of an oxymoron but it's not the same as doubt. The jaw-clenching and seething of righteous wrath fighting with itself over the right to be righteously wrathful is different from E6 rolling over and showing its throat as bottom dog. And with One leading and a Six fix,you won't see that throat. You may see a lot of melodramatic 'poor me' (think Margaret Thatcher) but you won't see the roll over and show throat of bottom dog. With 6 lead with 1 fix you'll see both. Despite whatever he says, how often does Peterson appear here with his body language and facial expressions to be begging?
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 27, 2020 10:38:39 GMT -5
Peterson's hard for me (Roshan) to do because I watched him so closely and know him and his material so well but it's been a while. I'm sure I'll wind up overhauling this somewhat. For now I'll say there are many Petersons. There is the Peterson in the Jungian lectures, including the young Peterson in the classroom. There is the Peterson giving his Twelve Rules For Life tour. There is Peterson among friends and allies of the at the time dubbed "Intellectual Dark Web". People should browse around for now as I've been doing and I'll put more examples at some point. But almost all Petersons--when not not in the stereotypical defensive posture--are very, very heady. They think out loud, they ricochet among two or more sides of an issue as he plays paddle ball with his own mind. They predict worst case scenarios, they express his chronic anxiety, they reveal him to be very fear-based. HIs Jungian work itself is based on the hero's journey and he thrust himself counterphobically into the role of the hero witth Bill C16, inevitably winding up both polarizing and lacking in quite enough conviction to just fight. Peterson is actually a prototypical Six. Tilting at windmills is Six lead " Hero", not One "The Reformer". Don Quixote is a One-fixed Six, not the other way around. This very clearly. His relationship to Sancho is classic, archetypal 6 and 9.
Which is not to say what Peterson tilts at isn't in large part real. It's the way he tilts that made it windmills for so many people when it didn't have to be, when it could have been revealed instead to them to be giants. Peterson's phobic/counterphobic flip flops were in large part responsible for this. In terms of his approach,he just did not quite 'get it right', but not for lack of trying--not forlackof heroic efforts.
|
|
