Personality identification of Ideologies: Oversimplified?

Post Reply New Topic

I've been reading some of the threads that seek to identify variables associated with various ideologies. And I can't help but find that a lot of the work done in the US seems too bloody simple - I mean, you're carving the spectrum into two ideologies (or perhaps you might add right-libertarianism) and then tract on "novelty-seeking" to liberals and "orderliness seeking" to conservatives. Perhaps I should follow this area of research a little closer, but I can't help but think that reality must be more multifaceted and contradictory than simply this. And I'm also curious about other countries and time frames - for instance, what seperates a Liberal from a New Democrat froma Conservative in Canada or what seperates a Green from a Social Democratic voter in Sweden or what distingushes a Trotskyist from a Stalinist in the mid Revolutionary era of Russia.

One of the most interesting things I found out, though, is that across the spectrum (according to a 2004) politically engaged individuals tend to have a profile of "high need to evaluate". Surely this must somehow factor into all these analyses.*

http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040920/ ... 920-8.html

*If I sound a little incoherent here, it's because I'm suffering from mid-afternoon fatigue and my blood sugar level is pretty high.

a point. The contrast liberal / conservative is ridiculously oversimplified, and the factors that make Pete a Young Democrat and Dick a Young Republican [two guys from my unsavory past] are far more complex than change and equality. Not even mentioning my tendency to ignore the political except when surrounded by partisan stupidity of any shade.

"Need to evaluate", eh? I will have to look into Brer Petty and see what he has done lately. There are an awful lot of people reinventing the wheel doing variations on the MBTI - do you know about the ones "updating" the theory of Humors - popular in some cases, one step more sophisticated than horoscopes but not as powerful as MBTI.

That "Need to Evaluate" sounds [though haven't looked at it yet] very reminiscent of MBTI "judgemental" For what it is worth, politically involved people I know [not a big list, we move in different circles, but ranging from NDP through heavy Conservative] fall in almost every case into Ennea-1 [high principled educator], Ennea-3 [popular propagandist, Ennea-7 [energetic activist] or Ennea-8 [officer class]. Obama, Clinton, [no 7 president I am sure of], Johnson.

Trudeau - did he strike you as pragmatic propagandist or as bossman? I paid little attention in Trudeau time - beyond not liking or trusting him.

Eh, I can see the issue here. I mean, there is a LOT that is shaped by personal experiences in a manner that is hard to unentangle. As such, trying to boil everything down can be difficult, especially for us thoughtful people.

I think oversimplification is a certainty when you have a two party system. The need for consensus within a party and for victory over the other is probably the best system for smashing square pegs in round holes in existence. Not that the two party system is a bad thing, I still think its a necessary evil.

I still don't think that neccessitates the sort of very simply, binary studies social psychologists conduct.

I agree, it is a very blunt tool.

I knew there was one - could not think. Reagan - ennea-7 president. Now I can rest.

It used to be fashionable to laugh at eg the French for having a party for every neighbourhood in Paris. And we get nervous every time it looks as if three might rise up a viable third party.

Pretty hard to find a criterion other than gender - if THAT, these days - to make a rationale for dividing the populace into two groups.

I can't help but think if social psychologists did any really theoretically and experimentally sophisticated studies on "conservatives" and "liberals", they'd find those groups breakdown into an assortment of subgroups with conflicted psychological compositions.

And I prefer a multiparty system.

I think the sampling might be harder, which is why they don't do that.

Labels and language are good tools to describe things and people. If you want to get perfectly accurate at describing something, it takes time to search for the truth of the matter. Even then we are blinded by our prejudices, fears, and perceptions.

Here is my favorite test for temperment/personality. It's the Jung Enneagram test. There are 102 questions. The enneagram consists of 9 parts; each one represents a personality. The goal is to make it through each of the personalities and grow through the negative shadow traits of the ego. I'm an INFP btw number 7 right now, but I'm working on getting to the next stage. I think I've grown out of much of my hedonistic ways so maybe I'll take the test again soon to find out where I am at now. The numbers don't represent levels, it's all very arbitrary in that there are no better off numbers.

Here is the test. Enjoy!

http://www.similarminds.com/embj.html

This tends to be taken care of to some extent by factionalism within parties. Any party within a two party system is bound to be a broad church.



Well I dont think it is a choice for either or. Australia has a bicameral system that essentially works as a two party system in the lower house (though not really atm, only two hung parliaments have occurred since 1910: 1940 & 2010) and as a multi-party system in the upper house. In unicameral multi party systems it is perhaps too difficult to claim a proper mandate to govern.

I don't understand how people can be affiliated with a political party for their whole life. I change ideologies all the time. Now I am a member of my own political party called Freedom Fries. It all about absurdism in politics. If you want to join, I'll have to brainwash you first and you have to take my personality test. Psychopaths are welcome too, but we don't believe in killing. When I say we, I actually just mean me. I'm the only one in my political club right now. Well, my imaginary friend is too, but you can't see him so that doesn't matter.

If I can see your imaginary friend, do I still get in?

No, I cannot imagine even long term political brand loyalty - but I know it happens. I know several people who are lifelong this or that.There are a lot of people and things that are me unclear.

Personality has a microscopic effect on ideology.

People adapt their personalities to their beliefs at least as often as the opposite.

Racist skinheads sometimes become anti-racist skinheads- using perceived racism on your part as an excuse fo beat you up because theyve decided its wrong to beat you up because you're a different race.

There is more variety in personalty types within any creed than between any two creeds.

Islam, for example, has the equivalent of flower children ( the Suffis), and the equivalent of the KKK (the Wahabiist sect), and everything in between, showing that more than one personality type can be muslim- ditto christian, communist, or root for the Redskins,etc.

True enough - as regards choice of ideology.

Personality does, though, affect the twist you put on it.

No idea is safe.

Democracy will automatically lead to a dual system. Even if you have a dozen of more focused parties, they will calculate and combine to have better chances to turn into a majority that will win. How to address complex issues in a binary system?

Oversimplification is just the effect of a this system and most of the people like simple choices.

W. Churchill