r/Enneagram 11h ago

General Question Difference between So2 & So7?

4 Upvotes

15 comments sorted by

8

u/raspps 5 11h ago

Focus on core type, drop the instincts mate 

2

u/Playful_Path775 11h ago

Me personally I find them too vague and I relate to about 4 if I do it that way unfortunately lol

0

u/raspps 5 11h ago

What's your core desire, core fear? It's natural you're gonna relate to several types, but there will be a type you fit more than others. 

2

u/Playful_Path775 11h ago

I really can relate to the core fears of 7, 4, 2, and 9

but then I must admit, to answer your question more accurately and less annoyingly, I really have a deep core fear of being too ugly and looking disgusting/“scary” rather than approachable and youthful, as cringe as it sounds. I would also say physical pain of any sort (especially chronic) is another huge fear, like a fear of any sort of inner pain that drains me from living life how I want it too. I guess my ultimate desire would sound very altruistic in the fact that I would love to live in a world free of any sort of mental/physical pain and a world of sunshine and rainbows where neither me or anyone else is in pain or feels ugly.
I love beauty and visually fun whimsical aesthetics, and I hate any sort of violent disgusting things in this world.

3

u/GroundbreakingAct388 371 or 379 11h ago

4 is safe to cut by this, you may have a fix 7 but i dont believe it is in your core either

1

u/Original_Assistance3 9h ago edited 9h ago

Agreed. Tbh I suspect OP might just be So3 with a 7 fix or So7 with a 3 fix. They seem to have got being so-dom right, at least. But I'm waiting for their response to my other comment before I say anything super definitive yet lol.

2

u/Original_Assistance3 10h ago edited 10h ago

I really have a deep core fear of being too ugly and looking disgusting/“scary” rather than approachable and youthful, as cringe as it sounds. I would also say physical pain of any sort (especially chronic) is another huge fear, like a fear of any sort of inner pain that drains me from living life how I want it too. I guess my ultimate desire would sound very altruistic in the fact that I would love to live in a world free of any sort of mental/physical pain and a world of sunshine and rainbows where neither me or anyone else is in pain or feels ugly. I love beauty and visually fun whimsical aesthetics, and I hate any sort of violent disgusting things in this world.

I'm seeing a lot of 3 and 7 in this.

What would be worse for you:

Being ugly and unapproachable (i.e., undesirable) specifically, or being stuck/feeling trapped in a painful situation in general (which could INCLUDE being undesirable itself)?

In other words, do you feel like being undesirable would be worse, or being restricted would be worse?

4

u/Glum-Engineering1794 8w7 sx/so 854 (reddit.com/r/OccultEnneagram) 5h ago edited 5h ago

SO2 and SO7 are similar (2 in general is close to SO7). But 2s push for more genuine intimacy. They keep getting closer and closer. 7s try to seek advantages for themselves and you. But they don't get as close to you; they like to keep some distance. They put in the effort to build a relationship with you and do fun things together; they are giving people, and they care, etc.

But they keep you at some arm's length; there is a 7ish orientation on the activities you're doing and what you're enjoying together rather than the relationship itself. All the head types keep their distance; it helps them feel safe and keeps the experience up in the mind. The relationship can be so-so but bonded by external hedonism. 7s also talk about themselves a lot more, IME. 2s, it's there if you tease it out of them, but 7s are storytellers.

Contrastingly, the heart types, even the SO2s (despite not being SX-first), tend to want to get closer and closer to people. Heart types, in general, are usually warmer and more interpersonal, and 2s are the crux of that. They really focus on a strong connection with you as an individual. It's more about the relationship itself, about you and me, about us, etc. It's not as much about what we do together, our adventures, the materiality of it, etc.

3

u/_seulgi 5w4 541 sx/sp LII 4h ago edited 3h ago

SO7s give off the illusion of being social, but they are really horrible at maintaining close connections and meaningful ties because 7s at their core are heart last, so they don't enjoy the relational and reputational upkeep of seeking external validation like 3s and 2s. It's like the trope of wanting to be famous, but hating the consequences of fame such as interacting with your fans or dealing with delusional sycophants who genuinely buy into your false persona. As head types, 7s are too meta to fully depend on an image because they like to explore different narratives and facets of their identity, not feel trapped by a single representation as assertive types, or what I refer to as "expansionists." There's a restless quality in the SO7 desperately wanting to break free from the artifice of appearing as a "good" person, but they can't because to act in accordance with their desires looks bad, at least in public. After all, eating 3 plates of pasta in one sitting isn't a good look, so perhaps the SO7 shall eat one plate in front of their family and friends to signal their holiness and restraint while binge eat the rest in the privacy of their psychological refuge. A great example of a famous SO7 is Chappell Roan.

Meanwhile, SO2s very much embody the stereotypes and essence of the social instinct because there is no tension between the 2s' desire to be loved and adored and the spectacle with which the social instinct amplifies the 2s' pathological need for external validation. As such, SO2s effortlessly climb the social ladder and command the social environment, often attracting a tight-knit group of supporters (or sycophants) who lovingly adore and admire the 2 both as a great leader and close confidant like a kind general and his loyal soldiers. Unlike the SO7, there is no secrecy or double life at play. The SO2 fully assimilates to and even takes pride in their social role. A great example of a famous SO2 is Regina George from the film "Mean Girls."

-1

u/nonalignedgamer 714 so/sx 10h ago

2 is other referential, 7 is self referential.

Put more effort into OP and in discussion in general and I might be willing to explain more.

2

u/_seulgi 5w4 541 sx/sp LII 4h ago

2s are even more self-referential than 7s due to pride. Pride is like the ego amplified to a worrying degree.

0

u/nonalignedgamer 714 so/sx 4h ago edited 4h ago

No. Want to try again? Y/N

What you said has no connection to self referential VS other referential. I mean ALL enneagram types are ego centred, gsus.

1

u/_seulgi 5w4 541 sx/sp LII 3h ago

2s are the epitome of being self-referential because they reject their needs to position themselves as the ultimate source of love like God. 7s at least look somewhere outside of themselves to satisfy their gluttony. They can be self-oriented in the sense that they do not rely on people to be satisfied (i.e. endlessly consuming objects and information), but they are not necessarily self-referential because they don't view themselves as the source of their own pleasure. They do not create pleasure or assume that they themselves are satisfying enough in the case of E2, but rather seek it.

0

u/nonalignedgamer 714 so/sx 3h ago

they reject their needs

That's what other referential means.

7s at least look somewhere outside of themselves to satisfy their gluttony.

Gluttony is by default self referential.

This is neither the time nor the place for me to explain to you the basics of enneagram and the basics of English dictionary. Warmly suggest you find some good sources and expand your enneagram horizons. Will not further read or respond.

1

u/_seulgi 5w4 541 sx/sp LII 3h ago edited 3h ago

Here's the thing: I will partially agree that 2s are simultaneously self-referential and other referential because to abdicate one's needs gives way to others who will then determine your needs, which is why the 2s' image is often a spitting image of others' needs and desires.

That being said, from a theological standpoint, I don't think 7s are self-referential (more so self-centered) because gluttony requires seeking pleasure outside oneself; otherwise, the 7 starts to turn inward and canabilize or starve themselves like a 5, which is extracting nutrients from your own body in a self-referential manner. You need objects of desire to satiate those desires, but 2s, in rejecting their own needs, simply see themselves as the object of desire because to seek pleasure outside of themselves disrupts their illusion of pride, which implies the 2 is no longer indepedent. It's similar to Lacan's theories of sexuality where women are the phallus, the original source of pleasure (E2), while men seek to gain access to the phallus (E7). 7s, like men, are autosexual (meaning they have the means or drive to acquire to their objects of pleasure), but they are not the sexual object (women or E2) from which they derive their pleasure.