Getting There

Note: This was originally published on 8/5/08.

so its thursdee july 31st and mary bef calls me up and she sez to me she sez cindi did you no de iea confrence starts tomorree an i sez to mary bef i sez naw i din no i thought it was saturdee but she sez naw its tomorree and I sez o an she sez we haint registered fer it an I sez i no an i gess we aint gonna go and she says but we gotta go and i sez but can we still go and she sez i dunno less fin out and i sez ok. so we gets off de fone and she calls de iea and i looks on de internets fer a long time tryin to see if i had a discount coupon an how much was on me credit card and like wuts de deal and den i tinks i better call mary bef and she sez lets never get off de fone like dat ever again i get angshus wen i don no what ur doin and i sez ok an i sez wat did u fin out an she sez we can go and pay at de door so less go to georgia an i sez ok and she sez wen u wanna go an i sez tomorree an she sez wuts rong wif now an i sez i got stuff to do an she sez come ober after ur dun an will go tonite and i sez ok an i put sum stuf in a bag an i do wut i gots to do an den i go ober dere an den we go to georgia.
Okay, I'll drop the dialect now. We arrived in Atlanta in the wee hours and checked into a crappy hotel. Something of a French farce concerning the hotel phone ensued. We got about an hour of sleep, and then it was conference time.
The conference was at the Renaissance Concourse Hotel (which was lovely) in Atlanta. This year's theme was "Life... Energy... Growth: the Evolving Enneagram." We payed our money, grabbed our tote bags and name tags and headed right to the keynote address.
The keynote address was "Quantum Thinking the Enneagram." It was given by Dianne Collins. Here's an excerpt from Dianne's bio:
"Dianne Collins is the creator of QuantumThink, a groundbreaking new system of thinking that blends the genius of modern science with ancient spiritual knowledge and wisdom... she taps into human faculties not addressed in traditional education, such as intent, intuition, and nonlocal mind, to enable people to make distinctions that can propel them from limited industrial age thinking into the multidimensional reality of our current quantum age."
That pretty much gives you an idea of what the speech was like. Here's some of what she talked about (I have, in some cases, added my own notes relating her ideas to my understanding of the Enneagram.):
Why, Dianne asked, don't we live the wisdom that we know? Why is it that, in this age, with all the recorded wisdom of humanity available at the touch of an i-phone, we all still (in my own words) act like damn fools? Why does the world still look like it does? How can people still think it's cool to build weapons and wage wars and kill other people? (How can people who know the Enneagram still act like a-holes sometimes?)
Perhaps, Dianne asserts, it is because we have been conditioned to have a classical/ mechanical worldview. This is a way of thinking that treats the universe as a machine made up of separate (but interlocking) parts. It is a worldview that prioritizes action. Problems are solved by finding the faulty part and fixing or replacing it. This is the sort of worldview that treats spirituality as if it was totally separate from the workplace and educational system. This worldview is why it is even a question that the Ennegram, for instance, should be taught in schools and businesses.
Consequences of the classical/ mechanical worldview include an us versus them orientation. Even so-called "spiritually enlightened" people divide humanity into "awakened souls" and "sleepwalkers".
However, according to a quantum worldview, the universe is more like a giant thought that a giant machine. This worldview prioritizes intent over action. (Watch The Secret if you're not sure what this means.) It resonates with the passage from the Upanishads which reads, "What a person thinks, he becomes." This idea is mirrored in the world's sacred texts.
Dianne talked about what she calls "the least action pathway." Basically, it is acting and thinking a certain way out of habit, even when you know better. This is like what we, in Enneagram circles, call "being on automatic", like when you mindlessly play out your type fixation rather than acting out of Essence.
She invited us all to condition ourselves to think with a new quantum perspective and to let go of the divide between the enlightened and the unenlightened. She talked about the observer effect and about how, by giving our attention to this divide, we help create it.
The move between these two world views is a leap. Dianne delineated four aspects of knowing: (1) unawareness (my example -- like when a person who does not know the Enneagram simply acts out their ego fixation all the time), (2) conceptual awareness (like when you can identify your type but simply treat it like a neat psychological description or a parlor trick or even play it up for fun); this is related to a classical/ mechanical/ separational/ analytical viewpoint, (3) intuitive awareness (like when you sense that there is something more to you than your personality); this is awareness that is sensed but not owned, and (4) participatory awareness (living Essence).
Dianne invited us to embrace transformation rather than change. (It's not so much a matter of slaying the ego as it is embracing Essence.) She asked that, during this conference, we fully listen to each other. Here's the way she put it: "Be as if it is you speaking, no matter who is speaking." I liked that.
My overall impression was that Dianne had things to say that were relevant to the Enneagram, but that she did not have an in depth knowledge of the Ennegram of Personality, per se. I think she was chosen to speak in order to broaden the discussion, rather than to hone or refine it.
Up next: some Enneagram history.
For another point of view on the IEA conference, follow this thread on the Enneagram Institute discussion board. Or maybe Mary Beth will chime in. Nudge, nudge.

Our Little Public Relations Problem

Warning: humor ahead.
On the last day of the IEA conference, the IEA announced a new initiative, which was then reiterated in their latest e-newsletter:

"At a time when conscious awakening is much needed, we believe it is essential to make the Enneagram available to a larger number of people worldwide. To this end, the IEA is embarking on a fundraising effort to organize and promote an annual 'World Enneagram Day.' Starting in July, 2009, we envision this to be a very special day in which a significant number of Enneagram teachers and practitioners around the globe will offer free classes, talks, and workshops to spread the word to local communities. Our goal is to make a significant impact on the world with the Enneagram, while enlarging our circle and inviting more people in... we believe it’s time to reach out beyond our familiar community and invite the world to experience the profound benefits of the Enneagram. This is why we will be embarking on these organizational and fundraising efforts to establish the 'World Enneagram Day.'"

Ever since I heard this, I have had that feeling you get when, you know, there you are, watching a train barrelling toward a brick wall, and the people inside the train don't know they're headed for a brick wall, and the brick wall doesn't know a train is headed for it, and even if they did know, they can't stop the train, and the wall can't move, and there's nothing you can do about it either. Surely the Germans have a succinct word for this. Let's just call it dread.
Why dread, you ask? Well, part of it's because my philosophy of life can pretty much be summed up as, "Let's not call attention to ourselves," but in this case, there is a special degree of dread because the Enneagram has a pr problem and it's like the IEA has no idea. I suspect it's because the IEA is mostly made up of people who do Enneagram stuff for a living and who therefore have limited contact with the hamburger-eating, television-watching masses on whom they are about to foist their ideas.
Let me explain the problem by means of comparison. Let's examine three fringe spiritual systems for potential pr landmines. I have chosen A Course in Miracles, the Ennegram of Personality, and Unitarian Universalism because (1) I am somewhat involved with all three, and (2) they are somewhat similar in that they all have their modern origins in the 1960s. Here we go:

Category 1: What's in a Name?

A Course in Miracles: Sounds great. I want to learn about miracles. Sciencey, secular humanist types may beg to differ, but I believe in miracles, you sexy thing. Points: +1
Enneagram: Indian-gram? Ennea-what? Idio-who? -1
Unitarian Universalism: A church's name should mention Jesus. -1

Category 2: Symbols

Course: None. Nothing ventured; nothing gained. Points: 0
Enneagram: It really looks a lot like a pentagram, and the pentagram has some rather notorious pr problems of its own. -2
UU: The flaming chalice. Check it out here. It's attractive, but it smacks of paganism. - 1

Category 3: Origin Story

Course: (From the Wikipedia article): "In 1965, Helen Schucman, an associate professor of medical psychology appointed to the faculty of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of the Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, experienced a series of particularly vivid dreams. Soon thereafter, she began to hear a 'Voice' she identified as Jesus which would speak to her whenever she was prepared to listen. Schucman reported that she heard from the Voice the words, 'This is a course in miracles. Please take notes.' Schucman then began to write down what she described as a form of 'rapid inner dictation. Between 1965 and 1972, Schucman filled nearly thirty stenographic notebooks with words she received from the Voice." Kooky, but at least it mention Jesus. Points: -1
Enneagram of Personality: Oscar Ichazo is the originator of the Enneagram of Personality (as distinct from earlier uses of the Enneagram symbol.) Unfortunately, he claims to have gotten the idea while under the influence of Metatron (who, as it turns out, is a real Archangel and not the leader of the Decepticons, as I had previously believed.) Ayyyy. -2
UU: In 1961, after a century of committee meetings, the American Unitarian Association (Christians who didn't believe in the Trinity) was consolidated with the Universalist Church of America (Christians who didn't believe in Hell) , thus forming the Unitarian Universalist Association, which more or less threw out Christianity altogether. -1 for dispensing with Christianity.

Category 4: Famous People Associated with the Movement

Course: Marianne Williamson, who wrote A Return to Love, which you have to admit is a catchy title. Also Oprah Winfrey. Points: 1 for Williamson, 2 for Oprah. +3
Enneagram: Here, I have to return to Ichazo, who is still alive and well and causing trouble in Chile. There are those who say the Arica Instuitute is a cult; there are those who say they do all kinds of drugs down there; there are those who have accused Ichazo of bad sexual misconduct. I'm not saying it's necessarily true, but I am saying it's not helping. -1 each for sex, drugs, and cult activity, for a whopping -3.
UU: The most famous Unitarian Universalist is Robert Fulghum, who wrote All I Really Need to Know, I Learned in Kindergarten. It's quite palatable. +1.

Totals:

Course: a repectable +3
Enneagram: having lost every category, it comes in at -8
UU: a totally manageable - 2

So, you see we have a problem. Here are some possible solutions:

(1) Perhaps, instead of calling it "the Enneagram", we should just refer to it as "that circle star thingy", which is less threatening and what we call it a lot of the time anyway. From now on, I will be calling this blog "Mary Beth and Cindi's Holistic Circle Star Thingy Agency."
(2) Well, there's really no getting around our symbol, so I suggest coating it in sugar whenever possible. The cookies (as in our logo picture) were a good start. Also, it never hurts to utilize the power of cute puppies. (See Saturday's post.)
(3) Origin: Whenever anyone mentions Metatron, we'll all just laugh like it's a big inside joke. And return their attention to Claudio Naranjo, who is a medical doctor and a Guggenheim fellow and who has studied at Harvard and UCLA.
(4) Let's all encourage Ichazo to tone his, um, intensity down a bit as he emerges onto the world stage. Here in the US, we have an evil President who got elected twice basically because he was more folksy than the other candidate. All Ichazo needs is a big belt buckle, some cowboy boots, and an anti-intellectual sneer. Then, he'll be able to get away with murder.

The Enneagram and Emotional Maturity

After Patrick O'Leary's talk at the IEA conference, Mary Beth and I attended a session led by Edward Morler. It was called "Integrating the Enneagram of Personality with the Levels of Emotional Maturity." Here's some of Morler's bio:

"Edward E. Morler, M.B.A., Ph.D., is President of Morler International, a management training and development firm specializing in integrity based interpersonal effectiveness. His focus is the custom design and delivery of bottom-line, functional skill enhancement programs that simultaneously integrate the principles and dynamics of integrity, emotional maturity, motivation, leadership, and the Enneagram."

Here is my (admittedly sleepy) account of what he said:

According to Morler, Enneagram theory, particularly Riso and Hudson's Nine Levels of Development, describes healthy and unhealthy levels of emotional health, but does not offer much in terms of how to move from one level to the next.
Morler laid out the following ways of dealing with a problem, arranged here from best to worst:

seeing it as an opportunity
coping with it
being antagonistic toward it
being angry at it
being passive-aggressive
fearing it (Morler defined fear as "considerations of potential loss.")
being anxious about it
grieving
sinking into apathy
death

These, he correlated with the Nine Levels of Development for each type. He talked about how, once you have identified the level someone is working at, you can move them up the scale, but no farther up than where you are. Here's the method he suggested: when someone is in apathy, remind them of a reason to grieve (he gave an example of seeing his mom lying on the bed in apathetic depression and reminding her of a house they once had and lost); when someone is grieving, bring up something anxiety-provoking; and so on, until they are in a much better place than before.
Then, Morler gave us another scale of emotional health:

Leader (one who is emotionally mature; when something isn't right, they respond by doing what they can to make it better)
Doer
Coper
Opposer
Manipulator (the most dangerous of people -- a con artist who pretends to be a doer)
Victim

(You can find a lot more info on this scale here.)
According to Morler, if you're not proactively creating something, you are dropping down this scale, which he also correlated with the Nine Levels.
Here are Morler's steps to change when dealing with a problem: (1) recognition of the problem, (2) ownership of the problem ("What am I contributing to this?"), (3) forgiving oneself and acknowledging one's positive contributions, and (4) doing something different.

Here are some of my critiques:

In my opinion, the Riso/ Hudson material does offer a method of getting healthier; it's simply usually dismissed in favor of more gimmicky approaches. What it doesn't offer is a way of moving another person between levels, but Riso and Hudson would probably say that that's not the point of the Enneagram anyway.
Also, the technique Morler presented seemed like a quick fix. He admitted that his mom, for instance, stayed stuck in the anxiety state most of the time. It seems like his method could be good for talking someone out of a suicide or even just putting someone in a temporarily better mood, but without the hard work of self-observation (advocated by Riso and Hudson), that person is probably never going to become emotionally healthy.
Another thing Mary Beth and I noticed is that some of the responses to problems did not seem entirely logically arranged from best to worst. For instance, why is anger a better response than anxiety? Perhaps Morler has a good reason, but allow me to advance a theory: the arrangement plays into his type bias.
Let me explain. Morler is an 8, the overexpressor of the gut triad. That means he's got a double-dose of preferring the body center (once, because he's a gut type, and again, because he's an aggressive type.) The aggressives repress the heart center. So, as an 8, Morler's preference goes: body, head, heart. And his levels of appropriate response prioritize anger and passive aggression (body center issues) over fear and anxiety (head center issues), which are in turn, placed above grief (a heart center issue.)
Just a theory.

Highlights of the International Enneagram Association Annual Meeting

Mary Beth and I are just back from the IEA's annual conference, healed, refreshed, and ready to blog about the Enneagram. In upcoming blog posts, I plan to take you through what happened at the conference day by day, but here are some of my personal highlights:

• I felt, for the first time, that I was part of a worldwide community of Enneagram enthusiasts, and that this enthusiasm might be leading somewhere.


• I heard a fairly clear history of the modern Enneagram and gained a better understanding of the issues that are in dispute. Until now, these matters have been quite obscure to me.


• I witnessed, firsthand, some conflict between the Arica Institute and, like, everyone else, but there was some conflict resolution. And hugging.


• I heard the surprising history of a very important book.


• I finally understood the law of seven well enough to explain it to others.


• I ran into old acquaintances from another Enneagram workshop and got to argue about the types of the characters from Sex and the City with them.


• I found that, at times, Mary Beth's hair can look even weirder than mine.


• I remembered why I liked meditation in the first place.


• I heard a teacher acknowledge some of the problems with Enneagram typing and propose an innovative solution.


• I learned that, much like American 4s, Australian 4s also talk with fake British accents.


• I heard about the Genneagram.


• I saw some famous Enneagram teachers bust a move on the dance floor.


• I was privy to a plot to take over the world.

There will be plenty more on all of this later. Perhaps Mary Beth will even chime in. (Nudge, nudge.)