The Press Republican

Wiley Wandering

« Interracial/Anti-social Implications of Dating | Main | Is Freeing Our Minds the Answer? »

Blog #76 Personality Types, This Blog, and You!

I am mischievously curious as to what you think about the concept of only 35 personality types? Yes, somewhere once I read/heard/subconsciously plagiarized the concept of their being about 35 personality types. Because I am too busy/lazy at present to research any similar concepts/theories, let’s just flow with the fact that there actually are about 35 (or 25, or 45) personality types. If so, the theory suggests that if you “know” these so-called personality types, you can recognize them as they approach you. You can anticipate their thoughts and actions from similar personality types you have previously encountered. In other words, if you are an anthropologist of sorts, a student of people (someone who can get into watching people) who actually somewhat analyzes, albeit veiled or subtle, everyone you meet that you have a moment to focus on, then you have mastered or are well on the road to mastering aspects of human interaction. After all, if you have encountered five people who have reminded you of one another, who all looked somewhat similar, with similar characteristics, similar mannerisms, similar intellects, and you encountered a sixth look-a-like of theirs, wouldn’t you be foolish not to assume certain things? And yes, I know this is an argument for stereotyping/profiling, so where do we go from here?

Well, the difference is stereotyping someone around cultural assumptions or negatively doing it around cultural stereotypes is problematic, especially if we aren’t quite sophisticated about those that we are stereotyping. Even when we think we are sophisticated about it, we really aren’t as sophisticated about them as we think we are. Why? Because of the fact that what we don’t know about ourselves prevents us from knowing what we don’t know in others. This much we should know. However, reading someone's personality and personality traits begs the question that you at least took the time to respond to their energy, towards you and others, instead of the infamous "assume." And if you don't know what assuming does, to you and me, then ask someone to break that down for you.

If that didn’t confuse you, now consider this. I’m out and about and witness, with a smile I might add, this beautiful brunette approaching me, with hair strategically tossed and parted oh-so right, a glide in her stride, a dip in her hip, future checks that will reflect and match her intellect. She laughs with ease, articulates passionately, confidently, intriguingly, yet can turn introspectively shy in any given moment. Add distinct mannerisms, similar backgrounds, likes and dislikes, and the question for me, and you is, is it true that you can anticipate certain reactions and responses from a look-a-like? Come one now, we all “know” the George Costanza type, also the Jessica Simpson type. While I am not trying to knock these types, how many of us haven’t seen these “types” over and over again. Well, if you know those types from watching them and their distinctness over and over on television and within our society, just ruminate over the possibility that if you had consistent access to a large number of people during your life, it is possible you could continue to see the categories of personalities.

These types, this Costanza, Simpson, or whomever the type you have locked in your mind as you read this, that look-a-like is an individual, no doubt, but to what extent? Is the potential to truly be an individual gone in our society? Has the media (yes, the media again) become the eraser of individual identity? Is it possible that the media has become us and we have become the media? Digital cameras, cell phones, the internet, texting with picture messages, Skype, MySpace, FaceBook, Twitter, blogs… Have we all overtly published again and again that limited number of personalities, so that those of us who take time to recognize them can see them coming. Are we also the “them” (a personality type) that others see coming?

The intriguing aspect of this theory is the “knowing.” How well do any of us “know” someone, or even ourselves? How much time do we take to ask ourselves truly probing questions about our psyches?

For example, right now, give yourself one minute away from your computer to ask yourself...

"What are the things that others might consider "obnoxious" about you... and what could you do to change!"

Chill for a moment, seriously. Give yourself one minute to reflect on the obnoxiousness you may bring into other's lives.

Okay, so, as I mentioned earlier, if we don’t “know” ourselves can we even begin to “know others” when the responses within those relationships are predicated upon what people actually think they know about each other in any given minute? Are we receptive to the fact that one of the ways we get to know others is through exploring the differences that exist between us? As we explore those differences those of us who know how to introspect may discover our reactions to those differences, better helping us discover ourselves. Many of us never tap into this dimension of ourselves because while we center ourselves in most things we do, we still don’t look at ourselves in that center. How can we? We are dysfunctionally preoccupied with how others are looking at us. This “way of seeing” is so reinforced, everywhere, that when someone does succumb to it, and even occasionally introspect, she/he are viewed as bizarre. How bizarre!

Do we focus on the fact that even that type of thought or the time it took me to write this blog requires a dimension of privilege that we can easily take for granted. I’m quite thankful for the time I find to write this blog, and the time you take to respond to it!!! I am the 32nd personality, the considerate, introspective educator type with a hint of anxiety and understated self-doubt, who benefits from the courage he luckily continues to find to correct what he sees wrong in himself. What personality type are you?

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blog.pressrepublican.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/281

Comments

Thank you, J.W., for opening this dialogue.

Perhaps the tendency to anticipate or predict certain personality "types" exists in all of us... serving as a means of affirming our awareness/intuition/world view when we are correct; and when dissonant, serving as the impetus to delve deeper into the mystery of that which makes us separate and unique...

In the end, we remain grateful that despite a dimension of interpersonal familiarity or predictability (that can be a source of grounding and comfort in themselves) the human spirit transcends quantification and categorization … as it points to a higher reality, a higher principle, a higher goal…

I do,nt have anything specific that I can relate to this article.As I said in my previous statements I'am under educated ,for me to try to understand what your talking about is quite confusing. You yourself say that you do not know all 35 personallity types so how can we begin to anticpate their thoughts and actions much less recognize the personality type from people we have encountered. What personality type are they? The Jessica simpsons of the world. I dont think any of us can totally introspect . Whatever that means? I guess we could get to know someone by exploring the differences between ourselves but never totally could we understand someone or their different personallity type .Aren't we imposing our judgement on others by continuing to study their mannerisms ,intellect . I Think I can somewhat agree with the fact that in all human interactions one must evaluate how you are received and perceived, and vice versus. But in all my lifes interpersonal experiences I can say that no two people are alike and I've encountered many a disappointing experience. I never know what to expect so for me. Speaking of relationships and people in general. The best thing for me to do is just sit back and observe rather than to jump right in and say or do things that are taken out of context or perceived by others incorrectly. This is awkward and some have assumed this is unusual. But truthfully its not really my fault. People won't let you in their space, they are unwilling to accept us for who we are . There lies the awkwardness and confusion. I,m the type who wants to be noticed and understood I,m the shy and timid type . But I also have alot to say ,sometimes too much .I consider myself a social outcast of sorts. You could based that theory on1000 mis percptions . It's up to the individual onlooker.No matter the distance . I'm afraid I have not accomplished being understood in my lifetime maybe I,ve been noticed all along I,m just to complex to have known. Either way I'm sure its not affecting any and all the individual personallities I,ve encountered including yourself Mr. Wiley I'am also thankful to have the opportunity to express my thoughts and improve upon my understanding of everyday life with the people I barely know. I I think it would be nice to be able to understand other peoples thoughts beforehand it would surely make who we want to encounter much more assuming.

JW-

Hey...you asked a lot of questions in the previous post...and NO response to our comments? I checked in daily hoping the conversation would carry on...I really thought it was going to be an interesting dialogue.

Normally I'm excited about a new post, but this time I was disappointed that you dangled a carrot before us and yanked it away before we could get a taste.

It's one thing to expose yourself to ideas and situations...but if we really want to learn/change/influence, we have to INTERACT, right?

That post was provocative...but in the end...no one was challenged to think any more outside the box than they normally do.

Come on JW...as you'd say to me...bring us your A-Game stuff. We can think up situations on our own...we don't need help with that. It's the interaction that helps us all (you included, I'd argue). Conversations are what's going to change the way we think...not just a location on the web where we can write down what we already think.

*** Whaler, I feel you on your points, but didn't really get the feeling that additional conversation was required on the Interracial Dating topic, especially since it appeared people where revealing how they were socialized to respond or succumb to the discrimination that visits that situation. I honestly felt I didn't need to weigh in. Sometimes less is more and I don't want to get too preachy. However, I try to respond to anything that appears to be quite obviously in need of a response.

It's funny, but before I opened your post I had a feeling you might be taking me to task for not letting that last blog remain a bit longer, as well as not responding. Coincidentally, when I see the blogs listed in the Press Republican and I have the same topic for two weeks running, I feel pressure to put something else out there. I think the PR management has figured out how to motivate me, and are now including my blog in more of their advertisements.

One last thing, I will go back and revisit the topic of Interracial Dating and your response to it to see if I can't make some dimension of your response to it my next topic, "revisited." I am currently teaching African American Culture and will be discussing aspects of dating over the next couple of weeks. Besides, I can honor a request as well as anybody!! *** -- J.W.

As human beings we gravitate towards trying to categorize or to "make sense" of the people we encounter. We see them and in the span of several seconds have usually sized them up for who we think they are, where they came from and how they will think. We do this because if we are able to put them into a neat little box of sorts, we then can sit back and say “ I know who they are and who I am to them” and move through our day and our life feeling secure in the knowledge that we know who we are dealing with. Many of us fear the unknown; some of us embrace it, and seek it out, look to it for teaching moments and empowerment. I like to think that is my personality type along with occasional shyness depending on how confident I am on the topic or situation. Do some find that unsettling and unpredictable in me? Probably...most likely and yet I have come to accept that though this is what others might find obnoxious about me, it is who I am.

When we have sized someone up by their physical appearance and demeanor and then set out to prove ourselves right in our, oh-so-smug assumptions, only to be proven wrong when they open their mouths and the reality comes pouring out, is when we truly learn and evolve (if we allow ourselves to do so) rather than when our assumptions prove us to be correct. Life is not about living in a box, for me anyway, it is about how much living, and learning I can cram into that box until is overflows.

If I believed in coincidence, I would say, “What a coincidence that I am currently enrolled in an online Human Development course and the discussion we just happen to be engaged in is titled, “The Self, Identity and Personality.” But since I refuse to believe there is any such thing as coincidence, I will dismiss that thought and consider that there might be some sort of universal force gently reminding me that I have not posted to this blog recently. Coincidence would be way too boring and unimaginative. There, I have just shared with you a little hint about my personality!

The topic at hand is related to personality types. The word “type,” to me, is very restraining and set, cut and defined; like a manufactured product. I would prefer to study individuals in terms of their traits because traits, as opposed to types, allow for a broad disposition. It allows for a person to be described based on a tendency to behave in a certain way without specifically labeling them one thing or another. In studying individuals’ traits, we can get a feel for their personality. We can then compare an individual to other individuals we may know and see the similarities or differences. It may be tempting to judge a person upon spending a few moments with them, and while there may be glaring attributes, there are sure to be many more attributes which that person is choosing not to show you. Which, reminds me of a line from a Chris Rock comedy act: Chris says, “When you first meet someone, you aren’t really meeting them, you are meeting their representative.” (When he elaborates on it, it really is funny!)

The other point I want to make is that people act differently in different settings. Using myself as an example, I act different towards people I barely know. I am a little reserved and basically in professional mode. Same holds true if I am working or in a classroom. However, amongst friends or family in a casual setting, mix in some cocktails, and you may see some additional dimensions to me. (Insert imagination)

If someone were to judge me two years ago, they may have labeled me in a way that reflects very little of what I am now. Major life events have the effect of changing our traits, behaviors and attitudes drastically. Even smaller life events repeated over time can have the same impact.

The Five Factor of Personality Model, which you can goggle if you have an interest, is a theory that researchers are giving a great deal of credit to in studying dimensions of personality. It takes into consideration varying degrees of five traits: Openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism.

I agree that people have tendencies towards certain characteristics. I just think it is important to reserve judgment and invest in really getting to know someone instead of hastily categorizing them. You may think you know them, but "surprise" they had hidden treasures of traits they were saving for a rainy day, or perhaps you will accidentally discover the key to the closet they have their skeleton traits locked away in!


I love this Blog.... Classic JW: dimensional and daringly thought provoking.

It is, I believe, the opportunity to wonder through this world and experience the human condition coupled with the time and understanding for self reflection that allows us to better understand ourselves in relationship to others. You ask... have we lost the ability to be individuals in a world dominated by mass media, sound bites and technology? Like yourself, I agree that the self-realized person is less selfish and more capable of understanding others. I find myself concerned for this new generation that is so dominated by a new culture of communication: one that is driven by the need to always be connected, via a piece of technology, at a pace that is dictated mostly by speed and volume; resulting often in sound bites of information that have lost substance, quality and the human element. There seems to be little downtime for reflection when you are always connected.

The question remains can we really get to the “knowing” of one’s self and the other if we, not only remove the essential personal experience, but also lack the time for introspection. Much of who we are or aren’t can be discerned through our physical interactions. Lose all that and how do we get to the “knowing” ? Maybe it will just take people longer...maybe for some it’s even easier. That doesn’t bode well when stereotyping remains, as you say, problematic. How do we begin to critically explore the differences between us when what’s really between us is an electronic device?

I’ve succumbed, at some strangely oblivious level, to this new techno-communication style...I often catch myself reaching for my cell phone when sitting at a table with friends or family having dinner. Others at a meeting I might be attending are attending more to their phone. I try to be conscious of those moments and remind myself it’s disrespectful not to be attentive to those around me. It’s difficult not to get sucked into the digital experience. I have no doubt that the electronic age has profoundly altered the way in which we develop not only our interpersonal relationships but also our own psyche.

As for what personality type am I? # 25 I believe best describes me. I am the nurturing, compassionate type, one who’s sometimes a bit too self reflective and a tad cynical. I’m inquisitive and often reinvent myself. I derive great energy from those around me and the work I do. abv

Just last night I was listening to Jill (a fellow philo major) talk about her intro to the dept here. Dr. Maier walks in, 10 minutes late, to the orientation for majors meeting (she was the only one at the table for philo majors). He says something like "sorry I'm late; you'll get used to it; I'm sure you'll be late to all my classes" or some such. He proceeded to share with her the stereotypes that philo majors get; she said, after three years of being in the program, that they're all fairly true. And this is all compounded by the fact that she's an anomaly and she knows it; nobody expects a female philosophy major!
(not to say I don't *want* to see more female philosophy majors, but statistically....)

So yeah, I'm that personality--whichever one the philosophy student gets. I'm obnoxious because I wont shut up or back down; I know this. (I can be *too* self-sure. And on other occasions, completely lacking it. Funny how life is...)

Sometimes however, my weakness is my strength.

It's all a matter of perspective.

Although yes, as much as I don't like the notion of stereotyping, I've done it. The story I told you about when I "lectured" two chicks who I described as "cheerleaders". Not cause all cheerleaders are such-and-such, but the stereotypes here applied, despite any hopes one might have of individuality thriving...

The individual in all of us, is, perhaps, but a figment of our imagination. What is it that compels us to believe that there exists an individual personality in all of us? Do you really believe that there are only 35 personality types? I don't, yet I think maybe our conception of "individual" is no more than an attempt to distinguish ourselves from the rest, the origin of such a drive and desire lying somewhere in the depths of ego, pride, and probably jealousy.

Perhaps with the idea of the individual we imagine in our mind those who transcend ordinary, those who become, somewhat infinite, in that they leave something behind for the rest of us "individual-seeking" dreamers to ponder, wondering if we can acheive the status of individual as those who came before us. Yet, it's not hard to see how even the small timer can achieve the status of individual in the eyes of others, just like the monumental types of human beings.

So, maybe it is the eyes and perceptions of others who create our feelings of individuality. If this is so, what can we be without others? Are we only capable of becoming individual through the differences projected upon us by others? I find it interesting, because, I think, deep down, we all want to be an individual. We all want to be recognized, accepted, and even if you don't want to be accepted, you paradoxically yearn for acceptance through others non-acceptance of your desire for non-acceptance.

My next thought leads me to wonder whether or not our own exploration and ability to create the individual that others grow to define us as, is but a selfish desire. Does the essence of this desire lie in something good? Or something bad? Immoral, or moral? (if there is such a thing, and yes, it's certainly good to question morality, in my mind, anyways).

So Imagine: the woman or man who strives and strives to help others, creating medicine and distributing it to others to save lives all across the world; the boy who grows up to be a teacher and inspires a quest for education and success in the lives of poverty stricken, starving, underprivileged youths, to better them, to give them health; the advocate of justice in the legal system, who tries to give legal services to those who can't afford, trying to do "right"; or the preacher and priest who inspire God to help those in "need" of salvation.

From all of these seemingly noble journey's that one could walk upon (if possible), it is hard in my mind to detach the notion of the individual. My question is this, what lies at the heart of this good-doer, the individual? Is his/her quest to spread good but the camoflage necessary to endure the most self-satisfying and selfish existence possible amidst the jungle of struggle and strife; struggle and strife exemplified by the pain of others who lie at the polar end of individuality, that being, suffering? Suffering because it is the one thing that destroy's our sense of individuality, because we all suffer. Is the attempt to become an individual, perhaps the most inherently selfish thing to attain? Sure, you might say, but of course! Of course the person who seeks to beneift others will experience pleasure, of course that is necessarily selfish, what feeling isn't?

Yet, I dare you to think that, maybe, the person seeking to be an individual based on his good deeds in the eyes of others is simply using those others as pawns to create his/her illusion of being an individual by alleviating as much of her own suffering as possible. Is it ever, in the face of doing that which we call good, right or just, possible not to violate the Kantian principle, that demands we never use one as a means to an end; a means to create the individual we seek in ourselves? Is it the benefit of others through good we seek, or the benefit of ourselves through good we lust?

This question seems, perhaps, a jumble of "want to be" philosophical analysis, yet I ponder the implications that arise from the possible reality that we are never able to avoid using others to satisfy ourselves; to create our individual. Does the individual in ourselves trump the so-called greater society we claim to be helping? Who are we really trying to help. If all the good things you think you do, didn't, at the end of the day, bring you satisfaction based on the individual that is created in your mind through the minds of others, would you still do them?

What good can a want-to-be individaul do without others? Imagine a person, all alone on this planet. Can that existence, even though it necessarily presumes the end of human suffering, but of course for that one person, be an individual life? Can the loner attain individaulity with out others to help or hurt? I wonder if it is moral, in this grand scenario I have dripped on to this blog, to use others by benefiting them, to achieve the predominant goal of benefiting ourselves..... Or perhaps the question I want to know the answer to, is, whether in helping others our essential priority is to help ourselves? Maybe its a symbiotic relationship, and we get, through giving good to others, good for ourselves: The Individual.

Is the individual in ourselves a desire to attain a status that is not attainable? I hate to bring it back to religion, but has a human history rich with religion and the idea of after life and divinity, so deeply and subconsciously inspired us to be god-like? Is it the feeeling of being just like everyone else that forces us to toss and turn at night, knowing we are not God-like, just like everyone else? Is it the reason why, often times, it is hard to be satisfied, because God is Ideal?

This post is a very good one, and J.W. it shows truly how as a young society with many things changing, we need to reflect on how we ourselves portray our image to the world around us. I believe after all the questions you pose, and the take a look at our own characteristics ideals you place before us, the real beast lies within the media. As a young adult, I know a large part of whom I want to model myself after is in part of who’s popular in the mainstream media today. Styles vary, musicians come and go, and entertainers fall off the face of the earth. Somehow though, collectively the majority I would say of the young population adopts a certain style based off a group, or individual, and runs with it. For example when I was growing up you weren’t cool without a yo-yo, and it was deemed necessary to follow the “crowd”. The pressures of who you want to be are heavy when you are growing up, and thus mold you as you grow up. I feel like children get a sense of what is socially acceptable by their school peers, and have to live up to that standard or be ridiculed and labeled as odd. Some take this label and go with it through their whole lives, feeling completely comfortable, and other’s vow never to be that guy or girl in school. The sad thing is this identifying process can have many long lasting effects. If one person is labeled an outcast by their peers, than they may feel the need to be socially quiet for the rest of their lives, thus changing their future. Events in our childhoods that mold us have great effects, and could change the way we act and portray ourselves for the rest of our lives based on a societal label we get in school. This pressure is so great, that often kids live a double identity, and live two lives consisting of being one way at school, and one way which tends to be a much more relaxed setting at home, often feeling relived that they can be themselves and be as goofy as they want, dress the way they want and so forth. Why can’t we all be and act the way we want when we are younger? Why is there a front we have to put on as we advance socially and grow? I believe that many kids keep a hold of their front personalities in schooling because they are so afraid of being the outcast. No one wants to be that kid growing up. We all make sacrifices I feel when we are going through school, and hobbies come huge into play when developing your personality. When you leave the comforts of elementary school, and are free in high school in a sense, you have free reign to assign yourself with a particular interest group of friends. Many stick with sports, and play that role, or music, and take a variety of different subcultures along with them. They ultimately live their lives publically because of their associations with their friends, change their clothing style, and represent themselves with their own swag. The development with who we tend to be around most is a large part of how we shape ourselves as well. With the media playing the hip aspect of keeping us informed on the latest drinking game, or the latest shoes to rock, we each adapt it into our own lifestyle to show or disregard what’s being seen as cool at the moment. Most people go with majority rules, and as you can see everyone is wearing Nike brand shoes because they are the coolest. Who knows maybe the public image view in someone’s mind is so great that they put them on just for society’s approval and acceptance. This happens all the time, and although sometimes we don’t agree, we go with what the crowds doing, even if we don’t agree. One take’s his role that he sees suitable for them and roll with it, sometimes to hide pain and fear, or simply true passion for certain things. In the end we need to portray a positive image no matter what the latest trend, or how far we advance technologically.

I believe I am quite critical of myself and often take a lot of time to reflect on the "type" of person I am and what I bring to the table in encounters and relationships with people. It is extraordinary to think of the idea that we can learn more about ourselves by recognizing and then understanding the differences between those we interact with. The point J.W. makes about being preoccupied with the way others perceive us and its destructive tendency to create a gap between ourselves, and, well, ourselves, is seriously profound.

I don't know that it is ever possible to truly give up on trying to convey and portray a certain image of yourself while engaging someone else and discussing the differences between yourself and the other. I think it can be done on a conscious level, perhaps, but I think there will always be a subconscious mechanism putting forth the image we want others to pick up. Yet, if one can make it so they are only communicating with a subconcious intent to give off a certain image, I think they might be operating in an optimal mode of communication. After all, the image we give off is often perceived a certain way because it is in fact who we are. It is when we give off false images that a gap is created in anothers ability to understand us. Interestingly, I don't know that an image we convey that "fools" another necessarily precludes us from understanding the other on a more meaningful level, assuming they too are not operating with false presentations. Yet, perhaps it does.

By operating falsely we may be precluding others from engaging us in a certain way and delivering certain information that they would have otherwise provided had we not been "fronting". Thus, an opportunity to engage and discern differences between oureselves and another might be destroyed. (I think of the incredible front that often exists in the beginning of intimate relationships. If you try and say you always bring it original in the beginning, I don't believe you. If that were true, it wouldn't take nearly as long to "get to know someone." While you might be more forward and honest than most, you are still, with out a doubt, giving off a certain image, one that in some sense is not totally you) If, as JW suggests, that we have the power to learn about ourselves through understanding others and where we stand in relation, the opportunity to learn more about ourselves has also been destroyed.

JW, what do you think about our evolution and how the images or personality we intentionally give off and those that subconsciously glow from our presence change over time and experience? To a certain extent, it seems to me that we ought to be seriously concerned with the way people perceive us. It seems that everything we do is necessarily connected to the perceptions others have of us, our actions, and our thoughts, and I think you would agree. Yet, how do you reconcile the contention that it is necessary to constantly be concerned (consciously or subconsciously) about what others think, with the idea that this same constant concern hinders our ability to get to know ourselves through engaging others and evaluating differences?

Not only do we try to fit others into nice neat little deffinitions, or "types," but we do it to ourselves as well.
Working as a professional DJ I used to attend a lot of high school class reunions. It was amazing to see people who hadn't seen each other in 20 years or more revert to the same cliques, behaviors they exhibited in high school. The same groups would eventually break off from the whole and go to their own little corners of the room. I don't know about you but I think I've probably changed quite a bit since high school. I'm not sure I'd even like the people I used to hang out with - then then, they've probably changed too, so, who knows, I might. But to think I wouldn't be open to having a conversation or interaction with someone I didn't know 25 years ago is strange to me.
The guy who used to be the "class clown" might now be a serrious-as-a-heart-attack stock broker or something, but, when he's back in that room full of people, he's the first to put the tie around his head, unbutton his shirt and dance on the table. The class jock might be a brain-surgeon now, but he shows up wearing sweats, sneakers and a muscle shirt. And the class flirt? - might be married with 10 kids - but none of them, nor the husband, come to the reunion because she doesn't want them cramping her style. I'm not kidding people - you can't make this stuff - it really happens.
So perhaps it's not catagorizing OTHERS that is really the problem. Maybe we put ourselves inside our own little boxes - and only show others the wrapping paper we want them to see. Maybe we're quite happy to have them never look deeper into us than the thickness of holiday gift wrap.

Living in America in 2009, has become a competition and emulation of mass media that seems to have plagued every individual from the age of 5-95. No matter how critically an individual looks at themselves, the fact still remains that people are so engrossed with their television sets, with their magazines that they can't pry themselves away to educate themselves on the concepts that truely matter, such as racism, or classism. Instead we are so involved with ourselves, that the needs and wants of anyone else, seems to be minuscule.

One's desire to be an individual is thwarted by their desire to be liked, to be among the dominant group within our society. In a culture where we value capitalism, and the aesthetic aspects of our men and women, it has become increasingly simple to visually judge an individual. However, it could be argued that just because the assimilation into modern popular culture has caused so many individuals to act like popular actor/actress, it still can't account for their true character.

Speaking in terms of myself, I find that I am inheriting characteristics that my circle of friends have all been in possession of, however, once I am away from them, I am finally, myself, the outgoing, fun-loving, and yes trouble causing self, (but who isn't at 20 years old). This same complex can be seen in every individual in the world, not just in America.

The moving walkway that we are all apart of, whether we plan to be or not. It is so much easier to go along with the crowd and take on their personality traits, than it is to try and stick to your own. Besides, in a country where we preach individuality, ostracism of that individual seems to be more prevalent.

35 personality traits. . . Im not so sure, more like 35 DESIREABLE traits that is what I argue. I don't believe that I can look at two individuals who share the same temper, and be able to tell them what they think about me. . but I can attempt to tear that wall down, and find out what the individual truly is dealing with, because we all know...You Can't Judge A Book By Its Cover.

OneLove.

I enjoyed reading this because it is curiosity provoking, it is a piece of word that makes me want to research and learn, and that is why I read articles and blogs and such.
I am a human who always has to have language in his atmosphere at all times. I am always either listening to music, writing, reading, sometimes all three at the same time. Another strong part of me is pessimism. I am a big time worrier/procrastinator who thinks much more than one should at any given moment. At best I am quick on my feet and thoughtful, at worst I am qsychotic and devious

Great post, You make good points in a concise and pertinent fashion, I will read more of your stuff, thank you for your time.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)