Manipulative Personality?

Post Reply New Topic

aha! in which case, GA's last post DEFINITELY needs to rush off into the mature forum

http://www.wrongplanet.net/modules.php? ... sc&start=0

See ya there

When I'm really bored, I occasionally enjoy trolling or saying outrageous things (satirical or absurd). I don't really trip on power much because I am a strong advocate of egalitarianism. I dislike hierarchy and am opposed to being bossed around and such.

I have a complete anti-talent for manipulating people. Admittedly, this could be attributed to a lack of IQ, though I rather suspect that much of it derives from a). my manifest inability to 'read' people, plus a distinct disinclination to engage in such games. I know it goes on. I am sometimes perceptive enough to see it going on. Unfortunately, I simply do not possess an aptitude for it, which is one reason why I consistently get 'royally screwed' when manipulation is on the agenda.

I've thought about this for a while.

I think it has to do with understanding what the other person is thinking, or knows, and guessing what is important to them. Otherwise you are right, the conversation would go on and on. But, almost instinctily, I can tell what they might want to know. I've never thought about the process before.

And every school needs money. I think it becomes a balance. Would the teachers accept a totally unqualified student just for the money? Even if they would, it might be okay unless they lie to that student and imply he is good. A moral school makes enouogh to stay open but that isn't its only goal.

I'm not sure that's clear. Its given me a lot to think about.

I am very anti-manipulative, actually. I never even knew until this year that people acted in certain ways in order to influence the actions of others. To me, most people have always seemed very unpredictable and I really have better things to do than try to influence them. When I was little and people accused me of being "manipulative" for having what they called "temper tantrums" (actually sensory or cognitively-induced meltdowns) I had no idea what it even meant.

A good way to find out how manipulative you are is to take the Mach-IV test of Machiavellianism. It weighs people on a scale from 0 to 100 on 20 questions as either low Machs or high Machs. I am a low Mach; I scored 46/100.

http://www.salon.com/books/it/1999/09/13/machtest/

The Machiavelli personality test has a range of 0-100
Your Machiavelli score is: 69
You are a high Mach, you endorse Machiavelli's opinions.
Most people fall somewhere in the middle, but there's a significant minority at either extreme.

Here is my score. If I did not subscribe to a high moral guideline I could hit 95.

35, what does this measure?

P.T. Barnum never actually said that. His first rival did if I remember correctly.