I’m interested in your sentence “The goal of communication is to convey information content; the output is the point” as applied to truth-seekers, because I think it’s reductionist of the information contained beyond the direct meaning of the words. Things like tone, word choice, and timing (highly valued by community-seekers, but supposedly not truth-seekers) communicate very valuable information that can make communication more efficient even in a fact-based argument. This information isn’t fully encoded by the words themselves but rather is largely latent. The content encoded by these things can be things like “I have studied this subject thoroughly and know my stuff, you don’t need to explain the basics”, “I am biased such that certain arguments are unlikely to convince me even if they’re true, you should try a different angle”, “I am poking at you to get a sense of your emotionality so I know what kind of conversation partner you will be and thus how I should recalibrate my approach going forward” (note the feedback loop in that last one). In my opinion, these things are absolutely real information and are not simply signals of connection.
Great post! This made me realize: in personal conflicts my tendency is to shift toward "truth-seeking" mode, sometimes as a way to distance myself from the raw heat of strong emotions, while at parties and social gatherings with people I'm less intimate with I'm way more communal. I think my past relationships would have been way better had I listened more to *how* things were said, and *how* I expressed my frustrations. Likewise in social situations, I probably would have felt less like an awkward imposter/more authentic had I been comfortable with risking aloneness and being "truth-seeky."
This would have been an extremely useful article for me about a decade ago. Learning how to code-switch was essentially necessary to get a good relationship and job, and I think most neurotypicals do this naturally around high school. There are only a few places in this world where everyone is truth-seeking (Bay Area Tech Scene) or community-seeking (NY Art Scene). Thank you for writing it, since I am sure it is very useful for younger readers, or ones that have not done this introspection.
The last paragraph is so important— the world isn’t fully binary where there are “truth seekers” and “community seekers”.
1. individuals can switch for different contexts
2. individuals can use something *in the middle*
To use the example in the post:
“Honey, do i look fat in this dress”
“Baby, *with a hug*, I love all of your curves, how could you even ask such a silly question? If you want my opinion on dresses, my favorite is when you wear the red one”
For my brain to understand this a bit better, I’m assuming this framework has two binary extremes of “only prioritizing truth seeking” and “only prioritizing community seeking”. And theres a spectrum in between where you value the truth highly and also value community seeking.
There are a lot of situations where I am in community seeking mode, but think the definition would be more accurate for me by omitting “Coercive/implicit requests for white lies are perfectly okay” such that it reads:
“To a community-seeker, "do I look fat in this outfit?" is a request for affirmation that deserves a considerate response. [omitted section] Having accurate signals about the specific things people believe is less important than conveying friendship and solidarity, which is the purpose of communication.”
It doesn’t feel right to me that it’s necessary to be in community seeking mode that you must assume someone wants to be lied to.
For instance, If you think they’re question is asking you to show a sense of solidarity, you can do that and semi-ignore the question. If they’re satisfied with your response you can move on and they were just seeking affirmation. If they push the specific question, they we’re truly truth-seeking all along and you can give them your honest answer in a kind way as you reaffirm your solidarity and friendship
As Carole Robin of Leaders in Tech (https://leadersintech.org/) says: "hear the emotions, not the words". I interpret this as being a description of what you're terming "community-seeking" mode. For instance, when someone close to you comes to you with a problem, the verbal content is "here is a problem", to which the response might be to try to solve the problem. The emotional content is "I am worried about this", to which the response might be to provide comfort. (Whereas presenting a logical reason there is nothing to worry about can backfire, as it delegitimizes the emotion.)
Despite finding the post thought-provoking and helpful in understanding the alternative worldview, I struggle to unsee how community-seeking is *obviously* inferior. Nonviolent Communication is a field guide on how to vibe with “community-seekers” as a truth-seeker, and it seems like one may achieve all of communal benefits without giving up on integrity.
I see community-seeking as a failure to engage in reasoning, softened by politeness
I've always identified as truth seeking though I never identified community seeking as an alternative.
You can learn to talk to them as yourself without wearing a mask that doesn't fit though. If you understand that many people are seeking validation, you can respond with trying to understand their internal emotional state. Someone comes to you with a a problem and you respond empathetically, and this can sometimes open them up to your problem solving side when they know you really are seeing what they're going through in the way they needed to be seen.
Since you're coming from a place of trying to understand, internally it feels entirely consistent with truth seeking.
Community-seekers have a special subtype that I would call social-aesthetic seeker which is not merely about the connection itself but about the form of connection.
Enjoying the art of conversation. Playful melodic and full of evolving aliveness without people pleasing.
I really enjoyed this Cate! My wife and I are Ennagram 8 and 5, respectively, and I can see now how our solidarity as truth-seekers has given us much to bond over (and much to be blind-leading-blind).
I also assume the 6 should be listed among the community-seeker enneatypes? Or do you see it as straddling the two?
Haha I was wondering how long it would take someone to notice the missing 6s. I had them in there as community seekers, but Sasha (the resident Enneagram expert) had a strong dissenting opinion that they are line-straddlers. As a community seeker in training I decided to defer to him :P
Ha! Many Enneagram teachers split the 6 fixation into phobic and counter-phobic subtypes, so maybe those would fall into the community- and truth-seeking types, respectively.
I am being obvious here, but the community seeking mode often aids the goals of the truth seeking mode. Others are typically more willing to entertain my ideas if my mode of conversation seeks to maintain their comfort and confidence
Much of my management experience, and subsequent coaching practice, has been spent helping truth seekers get by better in professional environments full of community seekers. I wrote a thing awhile back distilling my best advice on this topic (note some of it is a bit SWE specific):
community-seekers end most text messages with "lol"
truth-seekers don't
so true ... lol (me passing)
I wonder who says "ngl" tho
I’m interested in your sentence “The goal of communication is to convey information content; the output is the point” as applied to truth-seekers, because I think it’s reductionist of the information contained beyond the direct meaning of the words. Things like tone, word choice, and timing (highly valued by community-seekers, but supposedly not truth-seekers) communicate very valuable information that can make communication more efficient even in a fact-based argument. This information isn’t fully encoded by the words themselves but rather is largely latent. The content encoded by these things can be things like “I have studied this subject thoroughly and know my stuff, you don’t need to explain the basics”, “I am biased such that certain arguments are unlikely to convince me even if they’re true, you should try a different angle”, “I am poking at you to get a sense of your emotionality so I know what kind of conversation partner you will be and thus how I should recalibrate my approach going forward” (note the feedback loop in that last one). In my opinion, these things are absolutely real information and are not simply signals of connection.
these are really good points!
Great post! This made me realize: in personal conflicts my tendency is to shift toward "truth-seeking" mode, sometimes as a way to distance myself from the raw heat of strong emotions, while at parties and social gatherings with people I'm less intimate with I'm way more communal. I think my past relationships would have been way better had I listened more to *how* things were said, and *how* I expressed my frustrations. Likewise in social situations, I probably would have felt less like an awkward imposter/more authentic had I been comfortable with risking aloneness and being "truth-seeky."
This is a fascinating post, really got me thinking. I’m glad you wrote it.
Thank you!
This would have been an extremely useful article for me about a decade ago. Learning how to code-switch was essentially necessary to get a good relationship and job, and I think most neurotypicals do this naturally around high school. There are only a few places in this world where everyone is truth-seeking (Bay Area Tech Scene) or community-seeking (NY Art Scene). Thank you for writing it, since I am sure it is very useful for younger readers, or ones that have not done this introspection.
I find it interesting that the Bay Area has extreme truth-seeking and extreme community-seeking cultures (hippie/meditation) side by side
Screw politics, *this* is what we should all be partisan about
The last paragraph is so important— the world isn’t fully binary where there are “truth seekers” and “community seekers”.
1. individuals can switch for different contexts
2. individuals can use something *in the middle*
To use the example in the post:
“Honey, do i look fat in this dress”
“Baby, *with a hug*, I love all of your curves, how could you even ask such a silly question? If you want my opinion on dresses, my favorite is when you wear the red one”
For my brain to understand this a bit better, I’m assuming this framework has two binary extremes of “only prioritizing truth seeking” and “only prioritizing community seeking”. And theres a spectrum in between where you value the truth highly and also value community seeking.
There are a lot of situations where I am in community seeking mode, but think the definition would be more accurate for me by omitting “Coercive/implicit requests for white lies are perfectly okay” such that it reads:
“To a community-seeker, "do I look fat in this outfit?" is a request for affirmation that deserves a considerate response. [omitted section] Having accurate signals about the specific things people believe is less important than conveying friendship and solidarity, which is the purpose of communication.”
It doesn’t feel right to me that it’s necessary to be in community seeking mode that you must assume someone wants to be lied to.
For instance, If you think they’re question is asking you to show a sense of solidarity, you can do that and semi-ignore the question. If they’re satisfied with your response you can move on and they were just seeking affirmation. If they push the specific question, they we’re truly truth-seeking all along and you can give them your honest answer in a kind way as you reaffirm your solidarity and friendship
As Carole Robin of Leaders in Tech (https://leadersintech.org/) says: "hear the emotions, not the words". I interpret this as being a description of what you're terming "community-seeking" mode. For instance, when someone close to you comes to you with a problem, the verbal content is "here is a problem", to which the response might be to try to solve the problem. The emotional content is "I am worried about this", to which the response might be to provide comfort. (Whereas presenting a logical reason there is nothing to worry about can backfire, as it delegitimizes the emotion.)
Yes, great example!
Insightful, said truth-seeker/enneagram 4. Cognitive dissonance for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
Despite finding the post thought-provoking and helpful in understanding the alternative worldview, I struggle to unsee how community-seeking is *obviously* inferior. Nonviolent Communication is a field guide on how to vibe with “community-seekers” as a truth-seeker, and it seems like one may achieve all of communal benefits without giving up on integrity.
I see community-seeking as a failure to engage in reasoning, softened by politeness
I've always identified as truth seeking though I never identified community seeking as an alternative.
You can learn to talk to them as yourself without wearing a mask that doesn't fit though. If you understand that many people are seeking validation, you can respond with trying to understand their internal emotional state. Someone comes to you with a a problem and you respond empathetically, and this can sometimes open them up to your problem solving side when they know you really are seeing what they're going through in the way they needed to be seen.
Since you're coming from a place of trying to understand, internally it feels entirely consistent with truth seeking.
Community-seekers have a special subtype that I would call social-aesthetic seeker which is not merely about the connection itself but about the form of connection.
Enjoying the art of conversation. Playful melodic and full of evolving aliveness without people pleasing.
Yes yes this
I really enjoyed this Cate! My wife and I are Ennagram 8 and 5, respectively, and I can see now how our solidarity as truth-seekers has given us much to bond over (and much to be blind-leading-blind).
I also assume the 6 should be listed among the community-seeker enneatypes? Or do you see it as straddling the two?
Haha I was wondering how long it would take someone to notice the missing 6s. I had them in there as community seekers, but Sasha (the resident Enneagram expert) had a strong dissenting opinion that they are line-straddlers. As a community seeker in training I decided to defer to him :P
Ha! Many Enneagram teachers split the 6 fixation into phobic and counter-phobic subtypes, so maybe those would fall into the community- and truth-seeking types, respectively.
I'm a 6 and see both in me, although personally I tend to lean truth. But 6s are ambivalent often...
I am being obvious here, but the community seeking mode often aids the goals of the truth seeking mode. Others are typically more willing to entertain my ideas if my mode of conversation seeks to maintain their comfort and confidence
This is such a great post Cate!
… (multi-track drifting with truthfulness and social validation vibes)
Much of my management experience, and subsequent coaching practice, has been spent helping truth seekers get by better in professional environments full of community seekers. I wrote a thing awhile back distilling my best advice on this topic (note some of it is a bit SWE specific):
https://summerstir.com/blog/tips-for-tough-conversations