Myth Monday [12]: Transmitting
 
Myth: 
 
“The Transmitting Instinctual Bias is the same as the Sexual or one‑to‑one instinct.”
 
Reality: 
 
In many Enneagram traditions, the “sexual/one‑to‑one instinct” is framed mainly as intensity in close relationships or attraction, often focused on a special other. 
 
In the ATA approach, the Transmitting Instinctual Bias is about something wider: making an impact, leaving a legacy, and sending a strong signal into the world through broadcasting and narrow‑casting.
Transmitters want their presence, ideas, talents, or story to land somewhere and do something, whether that is with many people or a carefully chosen few.
 
Transmitting is not the same as simply preferring one‑to‑one contact. A strong Preserving bias often prefers one‑to‑one interactions too, but for safety, comfort, depth, or practicality, not because of a drive to broadcast, shine, or “make a dent in the universe.”
 
Using the label “one‑to‑one instinct” easily leads to confusing high‑Preserving people (who like intimate settings and small circles) with high‑Transmitting people (who are focused on impact, magnetism, and signal strength), even though the underlying motivation is quite different.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

  Every day we follow unique patterns in the way we feel, think, and act. Some of us react to stress with endless organizing, others by rallying friends, and some by searching for what’s next.   The Enneagram is a map; a way to recognize the recurring routes we all take in daily life. It shines a light on the habits that shape our relationships, work, and self-view.   Most importantly, it’s not about labelling who you are, but discovering which strategies you tend to use. Curious which everyday patterns might be shaping your life? Stay tuned as we look at how the Enneagram describes patterns in motion, never boxes you in.     #enneagram #the2denneagram #Personality
Read more
  Whether the Enneagram is “scientific” depends on what is meant by that word, but it can still be used in a disciplined, testable way.   Do models have to be scientific?   Plenty of tools are useful without being born in a lab or backed by decades of formal studies. Everyday examples include: Weather forecasts people use that are based on imperfect models but still guide decisions. Economic or market forecasts that help planning even though they are not exact sciences. Many coaching and leadership frameworks that are descriptive maps of behaviour rather than strict scientific theories. The Enneagram, understood as a descriptive model of patterns, belongs more in this “useful map” category than in the same box as, say, a medical diagnostic test.    Using the scientific method with the Enneagram.    Even if the Enneagram was not originally “based on science”, it can still be approached with a scientific attitude. Karl Popper argued that what makes somet...
Read more
  Playful Friday [2]:   Today’s theme: Navigators.   Navigators are tuned in to group dynamics, status, and unspoken rules: “Who’s here, how do they relate, and where do I fit?”   Navigator: Likely to say   “Wait, who’s coming, and how do they all know each other?” “I just want to understand the dynamics before I jump in.” “I’m fine to sit back and watch for a bit; I’m mapping the room.” “I keep mental notes of who gets along with whom… it’s useful.” “If we invite them, how will that shift the vibe of the group?” “I don’t need to be centre stage, but I like knowing what’s going on behind it.” “I’m not gossiping, I’m gathering data.” “I feel better when I know where I stand with people.” “I know I should care more about money and maintenance, but I get bored with all that ‘nest admin’.”    Navigator: Unlikely to say   “I never think about what other people think of me.” “Groups are just random individuals; I don’t really notice any patterns.” “I ha...
Read more