Subject:
|
Re: Personality test vs. Religion
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:26:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1808 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton wrote:
> I've also noticed similar things with people who are just
> "decisive". They'll form an opinion early on, then focus on facts that support
> the opinion, rather than base the opinion on facts. Of course it's more like a
> sliding scale than a rule-- 'the more decisive you are, the more likely you
> might be to see things you *want* to see and ignore things you *don't* want to
> see'. But that's more just a theory of mine at the moment than anything I know
> for a fact.
This behavior has been described as "confirmation bias," though I don't know if
that's a formal designation or just what http://www.skepdic.com calls it.
Either way, it speaks of the tendency to exclude data that doesn't fit one's
preconceptions, and it's an all-too seductive intellectual trap.
> But that right there got me curious-- if people inherently *want* a God to exist
> (I know I always did as a kid, and heck, it still might be really nice depending
> on the God), and if the above is true, should it follow that religious people
> are inherently more decisive than atheists? And how about how closely you adhere
> to your religion, or how ... uh... 'vehement' you get at people who present
> opposing views? (I'm not sure I know how to phrase that in a PC manner at the
> moment)
It could depend on how much value you place on "decisiveness for its own sake"
versus "decisiveness when the situation calls for it." Dubya is a major
cheerleader for the former, endlessly praising himself for acting decisively
even when there's no benefit--and lots of detriment--to being unduly decisive
(ie, for making a snap decision without evaluating the facts and without
admitting the possibility of error).
I don't know that the theist/atheist metric is significant in this context. I
judge myself to be quite decisive, but I don't judge my decisions to be absolute
or unchanging. Other people may deem themselves decisive specifically because
their decisions are absolute and unchanging. Such inflexibility is, in fact,
praised in the corporate world as a sign of leadership and managerial strength,
but that just shows you how masturbatory and narcissistic the corporate
management structure really is.
> Anyone know any Meyers/Briggs analysis that cross references religion?
Ugh. Can we omit this jungian divining rod from our discussions? As a
predictive model, Meyers/Briggs enjoys about the same level of success as
palmistry or entrails-reading.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Personality test vs. Religion
|
| (...) How would you define decisiveness, then? The speed at which you make a decision? I guess I'd say that if you either admit you could be wrong, or actually do change your mind frequently enough, you're less decisive. But that's just the (...) (20 years ago, 26-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Personality tests
|
| (...) Interesting. In my own experience, necessarily limited just so, I have found this quite helpful. Granted its possible for someone reasonably bright to answer the questions so as to deliver whichever type they desire, but for bonafide (...) (20 years ago, 27-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Personality test vs. Religion
|
| (...) I've noticed that too. I've also noticed similar things with people who are just "decisive". They'll form an opinion early on, then focus on facts that support the opinion, rather than base the opinion on facts. Of course it's more like a (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
53 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
