Personality Cafe banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Assumptions at the bottom of this thread.
As the title implies, I am a firm contestant of the MBTI or any other type of personality theory when it used to explain the larger scope and orientation of a group or society as a whole. Firstly, it may be fun to denote a contemporary or hypothetical society in terms of a personality inventory, however it does not do justice to the nation under scrutiny because any classification is time-specific due to evolutionary and revolutionary processes that change the nature of a given society. Secondly, I advise to be aware and derail from the biased propensity that a lot of individuals demonstrate when grouping a certain personality type with that of a culture/society. Now, allow me to quickly elaborate on my given prescriptions.
Let's jump in to the meat and bones of my evidence:
As provided by a statistical cultural and political analysis that mapped the changing values of people for about three decades producing a two dimensional map that reflects differences in scores of diverse norms and values.
"Cross cultural variation proves to be surprisingly coherent, and a wide range of attitudes (reflecting people's beliefs and values in such different life domains as the family, work, religion, environment, politics, and sexual behavior) reflects just two major dimensions: one that taps the polarization between traditional values and secular-rational values; and a second dimension that taps the polarization between survival values and self-expression values. More than eighty societies containing 85 percent of the world's population are on these two dimensions. To a remarkable degree, these societies cluster into relatively homogeneous cultural zones, reflecting their historical heritage- and these cultural zones persist robustly over time. Despite the lasting imprint of a society's cultural heritage, socioeconomic development tends to shift a society's position on these two value dimensions in a predictable fashion: as the work force shifts from the agrarian sector to the industrial sector, people's worldviews tend to shift from an emphasis on traditional values to an emphasis on secular-rational values. Subsequently, as the work force shifts from the industrial sector to the service sector, a second major shift in values occurs, from emphasis on on survival values to emphasis on self expression values."
Can you connect the dots here? ok, let me explain it a bit more.
I've noticed that people tend to associate primary sensors with having an emphasis/preference on traditional values and intuitives with leaning towards having secular-rational values. Well, stop it, you dummies. Where am I going with this you ask? Simply put, personality theories are probabilistic and almost mutually exclusive. The observational and hypothetical correlations made are imprecise because the people that look for traits shared between culture and specific personality type hope to find lawful relationships. This is not entirely the case here. As is supported by the study, socioeconomic development seems to provide the actual lawful explanation that offers an insight into what makes societies differ in norms and values and because these societies are currently changing, one cannot ascribe to them a personality type with accuracy even for the fun of it. Thus, it is due to the trend in socioeconomic development that is responsible for shift in values. Thus, A society that is well developed comes off as an NF/NT and one that is based on traditional beliefs comes off as an SJ/ and even as SP.

Now, guys and gals, allow me to tell you how your intuition (see what I did there? lol) is partly accurate at least when taking a closer look at the population in relation to the specific values they hold. Have you guys ever heard of conservatives and liberals? Well, in case you haven't, these two polar ideologies are at the poles of a continuum that contains moderate-conservatives to centrists, to centrist-lefties and everything in between. Now, when push comes to shove, at least here in the U.S., on such social issues such as gender equality and homosexuality rights, people seem to polarize themselves. Now, I've put quite a bit of effort into understanding why and how people can chose to oppose each other. Psychological analysis on phenomena such as group polarization, think tanks, and cult mentality attempt to shed some light into the issue. From what I've read, social psychology explains polarization in terms of the values and beliefs and ideologies that people hold such as prejudice which stems from stereotyping and etc. BUT, it seems to only explain the "what" of how things are and didn't give me a satisfying "why" things are the way they are. Now, taking a look at the work of psychologist Jonathan Haidt and his studies of the five moral values that form the basis of our political choices, whether we're left, right or center, he pinpoints the moral values that liberals and conservatives tend to honor most.. Basically, he states that there is one big and underlying difference in the mentality (general orientation and, thus, personality) of conservatives and liberals. This difference is based on the on a dimensional response to one of the Big Five personality inventory. It is reported that liberals tend to score higher on OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE and conservatives score significantly lower. Now, I don't know if any of you out there have made this connection yet, but it seems that the big five maps right on to the MBTI except for one dimension which is neuroticism. I have discussed this with my professor of theory of personalities and he confirmed my intuition. Btw, he's an INTP, in case you were curious. I told him how the big five's extraversion dimension maps right onto the MBTI's extra/introversion dimension; the conscientiousness scale with Perceiving and Judging; the friendliness with thinking or feeling; and last but not least the major one which is openness to experience with that of Intuition/Sensing. Now, I know that the big five has a measure for neuroticism and the MBTI doesn't but as I've learned there are proponents of the MBTI professional community that have stated that they would like to add another scale that measures neuroticism. How so? Well, proponents argue that there is a correlation between Judging types and level of neuroticism. Basically, judging types tend to be a lot more anxiety/stress prone than Perceiving types. They sweat the small stuff at times more often. The opponents argument is that the MBTI is and should be simply an indicator of a general personal orientation and not used as a diagnosis for abnormality or psychological problems. Get my drift here? Anyway, coming back to the correlation between the big five and the MBTI in relation to the openness to experience and intuition/sensing scale, I will try to theorize why this can be used to understand/approach polarized issues. Intuitive types are commonly depicted as seeking novelty/thinking abstractly/looking towards the future and always looking at better ways to approach a problem, whereas sensing types are generally depicted as being practical/down to earth/ pragmatic/ living in the moment/ and even superficial in their philosophy about life meaning without a long and complicated explanation. With this in mind, we can theorize that intuitives are constantly on the search for knowledge and as a result tend to update their minds and thinking process with the most current information while sensing types' predisposition for disliking or indifference towards the impractical and theoretical information leads them to accept and base their ideologies on already established and practical ways of living and for the most part thinking ideologies. Making the comparison, people that score high on openness to experience tend to seek novelty and experiences( information/knowledge can be this) more often than low scores which enjoy a more predictable and traditional approach to life. Also, remember that people also fall along the continuum just like in the MBTI when one says that he/she is more intuitive than sensing or that they are more feeling than thinking or when they say that they are ambiverts. All in all, what I'm trying to do here is to try and establish some lawfulness based on the covariant nature of the scales from the MBTI and the BIG FIVE personality assessment to make a prediction as to what social issues certain types of people tend to chose. Basically, I'm gonna go ahead and say that we can roughly predict to an extent the personal and, do I dare say it, a large groups orientation towards an issue based on their relative scores on both of these tests. Also, remember that I said "roughly predict" so as to not discount confounding factors that I am failing to consider as there are many and, boy, generalizing from personality theories is difficult and misleading.

Bottom line, I'm gonna go ahead and finalize this by stating some of my assumptions:

1: An entire society/culture cannot be reduced/explained by a personality theory due to lack of lawfulness in observation.
2: A society/culture's values and norms can be predicted in relation to it's socioeconomic state.
a) A society/culture shifts from traditional to secular-rational values with subsequent socioeconomic development.
b) A society/culture shifts from survival to self-expression values
with subsequent socioeconomic development.
3: People's personality preferences ranges in a continuum from pole to pole. Example: very introverted/ambivert/very extroverted.
4: A society's interest groups/individuals (at a lower and more personal level) can be (possibly) understood/approached/analyzed in terms of personality in relation to the preference in social issues. Example: conservatives/moderates/
liberals.
5: I'm theorizing..


Links to support my claims:
Book: "Modernization, cultural change, and Democracy: The human developement sequence" by Ronald Inglehart and Christian Wetzel.
Haidt is a social psychologist that studies morality
Jonathan Haidt: The moral roots of liberals and conservatives | Video on TED.com

Professor of political geography: left vs right
Intro | The Plaid Avenger

Studies of the BIG FIVE personality inventory.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
Discussion Starter #3 (Edited)
yeah, I'm looking forward to reading that book. as a matter of fact I'm going to order one right now.
Btw, what did you think about I wrote? and I would encourage you to read:

"Modernization, cultural change, and Democracy: The human development sequence" Ronald Inglehart and christian Wetzel.
btw, have you notice how biased and how many self fulfilling prophesies that seem to take place i this forum?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
284 Posts
I'm on a fast and when I clicked into this thread and saw how long your post was, I knew I couldn't focus enough to read through lol. I happened to catch the author's name, which is why I posted. When I'm off my fast, I'll come back and read. Thanks for the book recommendation. It's in Google Books, so I'll check it out.

http://books.google.com/books?id=O4APtKh7JqQC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

I don't post or read much on the forum anymore since I mainly stayed on MBTI/Jung threads and finally realized there are no consistent MBTI or Jung definitions or descriptions. Even MBTI books disagree with each other. I'm not entirely letting it go, but I'm not focusing as much on trying to sort it out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
yes, i agree with you. my findings are inconsistent and immature. it seems that this community serves to educate the noobs on personality inventories and provides for a communal belonging. both of which i don't really care for. i just want information and once in a while i am able to find a couple of gems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
759 Posts
Wahhh people are different and believe in different things, all this stuff about typism is just silly.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top