Nine Points Magazine - International Enneagram Association

Opinions are related to preferences, but they add a quasiintellectual
element because we have given some thought to
them and devised at least a cursory rationale for our
opinions. We may have more of a rationale for our
opinions than we do for our preferences, but they are
subjective nonetheless. For example, I can provide you with
a detailed rationale for why
is the greatest album ever recorded, or why the
designated hitter cheapens baseball, but in my more
generous and enlightened moments I must admit that these
are not objective facts.
The second category—first-person experience—gets a bit
trickier.
The most immediate example of first-person experience is
our feelings. For example, physical pain is very subjective
and we can never truly know what another person is
experiencing when in pain. Doctors will ask a patient to
rank their pain on a scale of one to ten, but there is no way
to actually know what “one” is or what “ten” is; such a scale
is just a tool to provide the doctor clues regarding the
patient’s condition. The only data point a doctor can use to
evaluate pain is the patient’s rating, so the doctor must be
satisfied with this subjective way of knowing when making
an evaluation. We can never truly know another’s physical
or emotional pain, nor can we truly, objectively know their
joys, so it would be impossible to create a scientific
approach to understanding such things.
Where the reliance on first-person experience starts to get
messy is when it comes to our perception or recollection of
factual events. Every student of the Enneagram knows that
one of the biggest challenges we face is the difficulty of
seeing ourselves and the world as they are, rather than as
we they are. Spiritual traditions all talk about illusion
in one form or another and our susceptibility to it; modern
cognitive science talks about the many structural problems
with the brain that cause us to misperceive our world. (Part
II will discuss this in greater depth.)
However, we fall into the trap of thinking that our
perception of factual events (i.e., things that really happen)
are objectively true. When our recollection differs from that
of another, we automatically assume they are wrong, or
settle on some version of an “I-have-my-truth-and-you-have
yours” post-modernist détente that ultimately satisfies no
one and gets us no closer to the Truth.
What we commonly call “the scientific method” is an
approach designed as an objective tool for understanding
phenomena that be understood objectively. Granted,
there is no single “scientific method” and the more
complicated the phenomena in question the more
complicated the method becomes. (Massimo Pigluicci’s new
16
book, , is a good guide to navigating
these tricky waters.) However, the basic scientific method can
be described as these four steps:
1. Observe a series of events or phenomena.
2. Form a hypothesis to explain them or make a
prediction.
3. Try to through a series of
rigorous tests.
4. Revise your hypothesis as necessary due to the
outcome of the tests.
The critical point of the scientific method is to attempt to falsify
your hypothesis; in other words, to try to disprove what
you believe to be true. In the same spirit, I would suggest
that the to a scientific approach to the Enneagram
is to use it as a tool that helps us see through our illusions by
challenging our ego-based assumptions rather than reinforcing
them.
Here’s a quick example: People, especially those closest to
me, frequently tell me that I can be overly assertive in my
opinions. They say that the force I bring to an argument
shuts down conversation. My initial response is to become
defensive and deny their accusation. I then tend to blame
them, assuming that they only think I am too aggressive because,
due to the handicaps of their personality, they are
simply too weak to make their case. If that argument is ineffective,
I say, “Well, I’m an Eight, you have to get tough and
deal with it.” Finally, if I’m fortunate enough to have a moment
of clarity, I realize that the Enneagram is an objective
tool which shows me that I, like most other Eights, can be
too domineering and, further, that I need to modify my communication
style if I want healthy relationships.
There are two additional steps toward a “scientific Enneagram,”
I believe: developing good critical thinking skills to
apply to Enneagram theory and practice, and correlating the
biological sciences to Enneagram theory. This last step is far
beyond my expertise and the scope of this article, but I will
address critical-thinking skills as they apply to the Enneagram
in the second half of this article in the next issue of
.
Because of the sensitivity to this issue that I often encounter, I
want to again emphasize that applying a scientific mindset
to the Enneagram is not in opposition to taking a spiritual
approach to the Enneagram. In fact, the very point that C.P.
Snow was trying to make in his book was that the Two Cultures
can inform and support each other. As John Paul II
said, truth cannot contradict truth, and different ways of understanding,
when applied appropriately, will get us closer
to Truth.