Podcast - Episode 0241 - Your Personality Type Fixation (FIRM Model)

21 comments

• 

  • Erika
  • September 14, 2018 at 8:08 pm

  Antonia,
  You do talk about the FIRM model in OM, but you don’t explicitly say,
  “This is the FIRM model.” I believe you talk about on the session about Loop…the fixation of the Driver and how it recruits the 10-year-old to fulfill the fixation, but results in the loss of the thing we want. Your advice to remedy this problem is to develop the co-pilot.

• 

  • Darticus
  • September 10, 2018 at 5:18 pm

  Agreed, that’s my thought as well. They all seem to be methods of handling control or lack thereof. As you said EPs tearing down walls and IJs putting walls up. EJs trying to manage chaos through enforcing control. IPs seeking freedom by independent logic/emotions/opinions, freedom of thought. Though honestly, I’d group IPs with EPs, and IJs with EJs. IPs and EPs seem to want to seek freedom. Whether by tearing down walls EP style or by independent/subjective thinking/feeling. Whereas IJs and EJs both seek control IJs by seeking control of themselves, building up inner walls to make a controlled garden for themselves and EJs building exterior walls/systems to create a controlled garden for others to play in.

• 

  • Darticus
  • September 10, 2018 at 4:58 pm

  I’m a bit confused by this as well. Perhaps it is explained better in the book. To me it seems like three out of the four deal with control. Freedom EPs seek liberation from control. Invulnerability IJs fear being controlled. EJs seek to control and fear not being in control. Leaving IPs as the only ones different, somehow, seeking rightness? But I mean how they do it is basically independence of control. So it all seems to involve control just how people react to it, I guess. idk, perhaps I should pick up the book and read what they say.

  Here’s my understanding of it though. EPs seek freedom of control through a more extroverted/outside-of-them manner and this can be exhibited as being difficult to pin down, a need to explore, a need to experience, and actively seeking new experiences. While also afraid of having rules, obligations, and such tying them down.

  IPs also want freedom/not be controlled but in a different way. Freedom of thought/emotion via independence of such which may come off as a need to be right. They may have a fear of the majority rule, that the majority are trying to prevent there beliefs/feelings, trying to suppress them. So instead of accepting that others may have a point they double down on their beliefs/emotions and reject everyone else, perhaps without even hearing what everyone else had to say. Basically, I guess they don’t trust the opinions of others and fear opinions being forced on them so they seek internal freedom from such. Perhaps.

  EJs and IJs are pretty simple in comparison, I suppose. EJs seek control of others/systems, perhaps not because they want to control but they fear the lack of control, they fear chaos. So they take the reins and try to control what they view as chaos, that of which those who seek independence from control appear to cause, at least in their eyes.

  IJs then seek control of themselves. The vulnerability thing is interesting. I myself would classify myself within this category and I do certainly have security issues. You see I have a hard time trusting others. In my view people always want something so you must protect yourself/your resources lest they be taken leaving you hurt and broken. Hmm, I guess EJs see chaos and want to fix it, make it more controlled and predictable. IJs see chaos, accept that chaos is there, and try to protect themselves from it. So EJs control others/systems, IJs control themselves, the systems they craft for themselves.

  They also mentioned that there is spill over, but perhaps there is something more to that. For instance, I have experienced each of these before depending on the situation at hand. My default is to seek security/control of self. The next most often felt expression is fear of chaos/loss of control, which would make sense as one can only do so much by themselves. If the world around them is a complete mess then they, myself, may feel compelled to exert their EJ function and try to take control of the situation. Third would likely be the Rightness clause, the freedom of logic/emotion element, which I have a minor craving for but not so much as to seek that above all else. And lastly, freedom, which is something of a dream/aspiration, one that I likely will never reach but is nice to think of every now and then. For example my freedom dream tends to involve retiring to an old log cabin by some woods and spending my time as I want to with no obligations. Merely a dream but one that feels pleasant, if only for a moment before my other functions but in with all the “well you can’t do that because of X” statements.

  Anyway, I could be way off base here, and I’m sure if I am someone from the PH team will chime in. This is just how I understood it after hearing the podcast.

• 

  • Rachel
  • September 10, 2018 at 4:44 pm

  Justine,

  I could be wrong, but I interpreted the difference as IJs essentially building walls around their internal world and the EPs tearing down every wall in the external world. The EPs want to explore entirely unfettered and unfiltered. They dislike structure or expectations or firm conclusions. The IJs want to control what information comes in and how it affects them. So, they are trying to prevent the outer world from influencing them so much by building walls and sort of shutting out the outside. The EPs run willingly through the walls and into the outside, wanting to take in everything and open themselves to the influences of a moment. Similar fear, opposite reaction. In a similar fashion, EJs and IPs are the mirrors of each other. EJs have a fixation on establishing the most effective way in the outer world. They want order and control and to manage what is happening so that the outcome is as they envision it should be. IPs do the same with an internally focused bent. They are concerned about pure intentions and processes and with holding their ideological ground at the expense of creating any change in the outer world. They become unyielding and ineffective.

• 

  • Justine G
  • September 8, 2018 at 11:28 am

  This was very interesting, though I’m having trouble getting my head around the bit about IJs and vulnerability for some reason. Not because I have trouble believing they are vulnerable, but because I’m not sure why IJs would feel any more vulnerable than IPs, as previous podcasts have painted all introverted types as being similarly ‘vulnerable’ in the outer world due to finding it more difficult to filter internal-experience (in response to ‘external’ experience) than extraverts.

  Also felt there was a possible lack of internal consistency in this model, wherein the ‘fixation’ for all the types that were NOT IJs was kind of self-evident based on the driver functions, but the fixation for the IJs seemed more oblique, particularly when individualized for ISTJ and INTJ, though I appreciate you said these were just generalisations and there was ‘over-spill’ between types. Like Denise above asked, what is the difference between a fixation on not being ‘controlled’ and (EPs) ‘freedom’?

  I acknowledge this may all just be due to the podcast skimming the surface and not necessarily the model itself however.