E 32% N 8% T 25% P 41%
I don’t know if I listed that right, it’s from one of those online personality tests. I followed G because she so rarely does shit like that I thought I’d give it a shot. I’d explain it but, you know, who cares? You might about your own results here http://www.16personalities.com/free-personality-test
It’s all true when it is. The problem with these sort of tests is my inclination is to leave everything dead center meaning; depends. I mean this is what they come up with as the lead in before getting into the rest --- You are one of the Analysts - a rational and impartial individual who enjoys intellectual pursuits and prizes independence. You are known for your debating skills, self-confidence and impressive knowledge. Above you will find a brief overview of your personality traits - proceed to the type overview to learn much more about your personality type.
That’s true when it’s true. The test is sort of biased towards a work environment though, and when they ask things like “Do you keep a cool head in a crisis” and I answer yes, it sure doesn’t mean that when a stock plummets I’m prone to not jump out a window. I am rational and impartial when I am rational and impartial. One of the questions asks something like Do you believe more in Justice than Mercy. I can see how a Hell Yeah makes me look rational and impartial; my answer to that means just the opposite. I don’t believe in mercy when a travesty of justice has occurred, but I justly only want the guilty punished, and I mean punished in Judaic sense of ‘out of the sight of god’. I think when you’ve violated the peoples trust, the communities trust, you don’t get to be a part of it any longer. That’s not intellectual or an analysis, it’s a strong and biased opinion. That I think I am intuitive enough to discern the guilty from the innocent isn’t rational at all; that I am willing to deliver swift and stalwart justice is fairly analytical. That was my workplace for one of my careers.
My current work place, heh, is a different matter altogether, I’m pre-retirement, my job is dutiful son. The personality is not poorly designed though, I mean as for as those things go. Imagine leaving someone alone at their computer to do, say, the MMPI, what sort of shit you’d come up with. The MMPI is a diagnostic tool for anti-personality disorders and fill-in-the-blank-o’paths, with double blinds and a lie scale and it’s something like five hundred and fifty questions long and I’ve administered a few. No one looks good on that test; it’s the degree to which you look bad that’s measured. That one took a butt load of shrinks a long effing to come up with and it stills has one or two of the problems I already mentioned but those are dealt by 1) Sheer volume of questions and 2) it’s not administered casually or for recreation.
And the MMPI does do double blind and lie scale interwoven, for instance (and no, these aren’t real, I don’t want to help you get your insanity plea) question #1 Have you ever fucked A) Cat B) Dog C) Both D) Neither --- Question 316 How many cats and dogs have you never fucked A) Some B) All C) neither A or C D) None. And question 451 Do others think you are a cat or dog fucker A) Cat B)Dog C) Both D) Neither E) I don’t know.
So that’s me doing a test.
Below is half of an entry lurking when I shut down my computer last night, word wanted to know if I wanted it deleted.
Over the last few weeks I’ve seen, on various TV shows, a sort of common idea repeated often, and, well, that’s what TV is supposed to do, reflect the proverbs of the people as it were. I’ve never quite understood this one, though I’ve probably heard real people say it more often than actors; Look me in the eye and tell me --- you know whatever. Like someone is too ashamed to lie with eye contact. That’s not my experience. Anyone who has the magic power to tell whether someone is lying through their eyes should be able to tell blindfolded.
I think maybe some people have a tell in the eyes, but a tell isn’t the same thing as a lie detection, there is, for instance, a great deal of difference between lying and not telling the truth. For one thing a lie is premeditated. If I’m planning on perpetrating a falsehood to you and the only litmus test I have to pass is looking in your eyes, it’s the easiest lie in the world to tell. If I’m not telling the truth it’s possible it’s because I don’t know the truth; again my eyes will be clear and honest.
The one thing that looking someone in the eyes and lying does do for certain is injure the pride of person being lied to if they discover that it was a lie. The eyes don’t really make a difference except under the premise that the person asking to see them thinks they are so beloved that the liar would wither from shame. I think that might work with an eight year old and his mom, though I’ve seen eight year olds lie their asses off to their moms looking them straight in the eye.
The actors on TV who say these lines are inherently lying; they are pretending to be someone else testing another actor who is pretending to be someone about whether fictious events are fictious in the context of the fiction. I’m fairly good at spotting a lie; I don’t think I’ve ever needed eye contact to do it. Often it is the lie itself that is implausible and not the relative sincerity of the liar. Often when I ask what happened I have a fairly good idea of what happened and if the story varies too far astray the “windows to the soul” can do whatever the hell they want. It’s why a good lie stays very close to the facts.
Loading comments...