Personality and statism.

[Michael Fisher]

Having recently learned the tendencies of certain MBTI personalities, I think it will be beneficial to analyze the relationship between one's personality and one's statist tendencies. Personality is partially inherited and tends not to change, but this analysis could be very beneficial to recruiting liberty-loving individuals. This could also make an interesting scholarly research project.

The analysis will ideally require four sections:
1. Find statist tendencies of specific personalities. (Through a literature review, perhaps.)
2. Find pro-liberty tendencies of specific personalities.
3. Apply the discoveries to enhance the search for and recruitment of liberty-loving individuals.
4. Apply the discoveries to enhance our methods of activism to appeal to the maximum population, perhaps by targeting a specific group of people or geographic area of New Hampshire.

Some examples: (personalitypage.com)

-------
Personalities with some statist tendencies:

"ESTJs value security and social order above all else, and feel obligated to do all that they can to enhance and promote these goals."
"ESTJs also believe in following existing social rules. They often lead, but can follow easily if they trust the authority of the system they're following. ... They are generally law-abiding."
"The ESTJ is usually a model citizen..."

"ISTJs tend to believe in laws and traditions, and expect the same from others. They're not comfortable with breaking laws or going against the rules."
"[ISTJs] enjoy being in positions of authority."
"[ISTJs] internalize and value the rules and structure of the society in which they live, and disapprove of behaviors that go against these rules."

"[ISFJs] value security and kindness, and respect traditions and laws. They tend to believe that existing systems are there because they work."

"ESFJs respect and believe in the laws and rules of authority, and believe that others should do so as well. They're traditional, and prefer to do things in the established way, rather than venturing into unchartered territory. Their need for security drives their ready acceptance and adherence to the policies of the established system. This tendency may cause them to sometimes blindly accept rules without questioning or understanding them."

-------
Independent-minded personalities:

"ISTPs are fiercely independent..."
"[ISTPs] do not believe in or follow rules and regulations, as this would prohibit their ability to 'do their own thing.'"
"[ISTPs] do not respect the rules of the 'System.'"

ESTP: "The Rules of the Establishment may hold little value to the ESTP."
ESTP: "Rules and laws are seen as guidelines for behavior, rather than mandates."

"[ISFPs'] strong value systems demand that decisions are evaluated against their subjective beliefs, rather than against some objective rules or laws."
"ISFPs have no desire to lead or control others, just as they have no desire to be led or controlled by others."

"INTPs do not like to lead or control people."
"[INTPs] approach problems and theories with enthusiasm and skepticism, ignoring existing rules and opinions and defining their own approach to the resolution."

"[INFJs] have strong value systems, and need to live their lives in accordance with what they feel is right."

[Pat McCotter]

Personality eugenics?

[Michael Fisher]

 

LOL

Okay, now that we've got past the most obvious joke, let's hear the others.

[Insurgent]

This is very interesting. I know for certain that I am an IN but fall borderline between T&F and P&J. Are there characteristics for INTJ's and INFP's?

[David]

The advocates for self gov't folks had a similar topic in their newsletter some time ago. 

[Roycerson]

This is very interesting. I know for certain that I am an IN but fall borderline between T&F and P&J. Are there characteristics for INTJ's and INFP's?

I'm and INTJ and I score 100-100 on the WSPQ.  I know one other INTJ and he's a card carrying libertarian who pays no attention to politics.

[Dreepa]

I think that I am INTJ... it has been awhile since I took that test.

[aries]

I'm INTJ/P

That entire test is bullshit, however.
Depending on which one you take, the Myers-Briggs is the "best" with marginal usefulness but costs $$. The Keirsey is useless, as is the Jung... and probably every other free ripoff of the M-B.
The results are doubly so.

There is no such thing as an "accurate" personality test
The most accurate and respected one known to man (most clinical psychs have to take an entire course on it) is the MMPI, which measures differences from the population average, it does not classify your personality but your differences and mental traits. It is over 500 questions long and copyrighted, only available to clinical psychologists who have managed to keep it secret for decades. It's mostly administered to criminals or suspected criminals to verify mental stability and the possibility of any personality disorders such as schizophrenia.

And that's all I learned in Intro to Psych.

[Michael Fisher]

That entire test is bullshit, however.
Depending on which one you take, the Myers-Briggs is the "best" with marginal usefulness but costs $$. The Keirsey is useless, as is the Jung... and probably every other free ripoff of the M-B.
The results are doubly so.

Nonsense!

MBTI evolved from Jung's research, not vice versa.

The trends identified by personality tests are quite accurate for many people?especially mature people who understand personality theory. Personality is a widely accepted area of psychological research. Learning about the personality types helps one to understand trends in oneself and others quite well. The best application I can imagine of the theory is tailoring one's teaching methods based on one's audience; this is something very important to what we are doing in New Hampshire.

[Michael Fisher]

*Of course the tests are not perfect. How could they be?  ???

[aries]

Point 1: The MBTI is "better" than the Jung in that it uses more advanced questioning methods to arrive at its results. Just because Jung got the idea doesnt mean he did a good job implementing it. Jung's theory of personality types is nice to study, but it's wrong, and doesn't actually apply in a clinical setting. That is, it's not a real indicator of anything.

Point 2: Personality tests' main flaw is that they assume that people have one personality... it's like assuming that people have one mind. We have hundreds of traits that are all conditional. One question is always "I get energized by a party." At some parties we would get energized, at others, not. You'll find very few people who would be either energized or tired out by all parties. The question then becomes a 49%/51% question... what percent of types of parties would I find myself energized at the end of... hmmm....

The tests don't measure anything. They pop out a description that fits half the population if you look at it right. Things like "you are often running late, but you have your punctual days." Well, DUH! Everybody would say "hmm, I guess that fits me." Even if they're a punctual person. They'd say "well, I run late some days... I don't always have deadlines every day, so I guess I can't gauge which days are punctual or not, so I guess the description must fit me. Cool! The test works!"

That's called the Barnum effect. People tend to agree with whatever it says because it is generalized and makes clear exceptions. Just like the circus, it's "a little bit of everything to please everybody."

Personality tests are fun and all but they're wastes of time and not useful for anything except introspection. No reputable psychologist would say "here, take this personality test," and use the results for anything, because they're irrelevant to any known psychological procedures.


Ps- I'm taking this all on the word of my Psychology professor, who gave a lengthy rant about the uselessness of categorizing personalities except in the context of disorders. If you want to look him up his name is John Kulig.

[eques]

I have to echo what aries said.

Also, I've found that attempting to use personality test results in any coherent way outside of the personality test pamphlet just doesn't work.  There's a book out there that promises to match your personality type up with a career.  Truth is, it sets you up with a set of careers that may or may not be of any interest to you.

Case in point: I tested as an INFP.  But I gotta tell ya... I've had distinct occasions where I've felt incredibly energized by a distinctly Extroverted situation.  Also telling: I was rather depressed when I took the MBTI, and my Introversion score was very extreme (fully introverted).  I was depressed!  Of course I felt drained by social gatherings, parties, and the like!

Unfortunately, I didn't actually see this until a long while afterwards.

Also, there's something that happens with people who strongly identify with a particular type--they tend to cast people they don't immediately like as their "opposite" type.  Basically, they pigeonhole that other person whether or not they actually fit that description.  It gives you a feeling of satisfaction to know that it's not any flaw on YOUR part that pisses you off about that person--it's just the way you are.

I think that's a foolish mindset.  It's this whole "group association" thing that really bugs me... dividing the world into "black" and "white" where dichotomies (or sexadecichotomies ) don't actually exist... someday I'll come up with or come across the perfect phrase to describe my uneasiness with this phenomenon.

[Pat McCotter]

The US military uses the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) to determine where a recruit would best fit.

Then there is John Holland's Vocational Preference Inventory on which the ASVAB was based.

In addition to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator talked about on the thread I see there is the Strong-Campbell Interest Inventory.

Sounds like a lot of people want to put us in our place.

[error]

Sounds like a lot of people want to put us in our place.

Of course. That's the whole point behind vocational testing. And of course it doesn't really work all that well; it might predict what someone will be good at doing, but it doesn't predict, and isn't designed to predict, what will make someone happy.

[Michael Fisher]

Personality tests are fun and all but they're wastes of time and not useful for anything except introspection. No reputable psychologist would say "here, take this personality test," and use the results for anything, because they're irrelevant to any known psychological procedures.

...

Ps- I'm taking this all on the word of my Psychology professor, who gave a lengthy rant about the uselessness of categorizing personalities except in the context of disorders. If you want to look him up his name is John Kulig.

If you base all of your opinions on the ranting of one professor, then you're never going to learn much psychology, or anything else for that matter. Many academics are DEAD WRONG on most subjects, especially those subjects they specialize in.

Personality is a well-developed and widely accepted part of the field of psychology. There are scholarly journals that publish personality research.

Any theory that makes any conclusions on anything is subsequently attacked by a portion of a field's researchers. Science is imperfect and inherently falsifiable. That's the nature of science.

An individual's MBTI personality traits are partially genetic, and skills of the opposite personality traits should be learned and developed through life. Though some people have personality traits that are immature, conflicted, undeveloped, or mixed?such as an ambivert?the MBTI is quite accurate from my experience. I'm able to make many personality-related predictions (most are confirmed to be true) about people I see on a daily basis by analyzing their habits, attitude, reactions, and interests. Anyone who understands personality types can do this.

Do not discount personality before even considering it as a possible scientific method of discovering pro-liberty leanings among certain people.

Answer me this before rejecting personality science: Why are there so few SJs in the liberty movement?