About a week ago, I submitted a request to join a group of bloggers who have formed an association of sorts. Since I already frequent some of their blogs and enjoy reading the posts, I assumed there would not be a problem.
Then I was met with a somewhat stand-offish (my perception) response saying that my blog probably would not fit in because most of them are politically oriented blogs, and mine deals with a specific topic that does not have much to do with politics. (eh hem... I already read some of those blogs, and they often deal with subjects completely outside of politics, if you ask me.)
That got me on this thought thread of wondering why would psychology not apply to politics? It most certainly does.
Firstly, politics has become such a joke in America (in my opinion) that it no longer is about who can be the best leader of our country but about who can best manipulate the public into voting for them.
A funny phenomenon occurred over at the Friendly Atheist last week. Hemant posted a story about Elizabeth Dole criticizing her opponent Kay Hagan for attending a fundraiser held by an atheist group. Then something amazing happened. The anger and fury by the regulars on the site raised $1620 in just two days (contributions to the Hagan campaign), along with numerous angry letters to Dole. I don't think this could have happened if Kay Hagan herself had come to the site begging for contributions, no matter how convincing her plea.
I was watching this activity unfold with awe, and then it dawned on me. Remember I was wondering the other day about what motivates people into action? There was the answer in front of my eyes: Anger. Anger motivates people to act. Fighting against a common enemy is a far greater motivator than fighting for a common cause. And now I'm wondering why?
Oh... you'd better believe it! Psychology definitely plays a big part in politics! Or did you mean that MBTI doesn't fit in with politics? That's a topic for a whole new post.
(Okay... There you have it. A post about politics. Now can I join?) (just kidding!) :-)
It's just that "you don't quite fit in" strikes a very touchy chord with me... I think David Rees would understand.
Few things rile me up as much as when someone tells me I can't do something! I love the show Lost, and I often quote Locke saying "Don't tell me what I can't do!"
ReplyDeletePsychology is VERY MUCH a part of politics. Whether it's the appeal to "change" or the appeal to fear/patriotism (9/11), every politician uses psychology.
Also, psychology plays a big part in how we "receive" information. Do you focus on facts and political records, or feeling and trust in the character of the candidate. These are VERY real issues. I have written 2 blog posts about type and politics and they're getting a ton of traffic these days. It's timely, and relevant....an you totally belong!!!
Tell them to stuff themselves. I happen to be giving a presentation to my local APT (Association of Psychological Type) chapter on exactly the topic of Politics and Type. And there is a whole website devoted to the topic at http://politicaltypes.com
ReplyDeleteCongrats on your recent qualification btw!
Thanks, Breanne, as always. You're amazing! :-)
ReplyDeleteMichael, I see nowhere on your site what type you are. Is that on purpose? I would guess N and P, seeing that you have four different blogs started... I have four as well. Thinking, Feeling, Working, and a private one. (oh, and the teen one.) It made me smile when I saw yours. Thank you for your encouragement. And encouraged, I am...
LOL. Your type watching is very accurate! Yes, ENFP is my type. My private blog is the one that I spend the most time with, and the rest are "reprint" blogs.
ReplyDeleteI'm not a "blogger" because I hate writing. I'm a storyteller, not a writer. Writing is an activity for introversion! I'd rather lecture.
MJP -- Wow, I hadn't thought of it that way. Yes, I'm a storyteller also, rather than a writer. I like having interaction with an audience.
ReplyDeleteI'm about off to blog about why I haven't been blogging (meta, much?), and this fits in very, very well. Thanks for the thoughts.
Linda, absolutely, psychology fits with politics. If you look at the recent blog posts at PT, many of them are about the election in some way, shape, or form.
We Blogpowerers are an eclectic bunch, so I think you'd fit right in. :-)
ReplyDeleteI'm sure she just meant that someone looking to increase their readership wouldn't fit in - as we're a pretty lazy bunch as well.
Thank you Matt,
ReplyDeleteummm...
"our group consists of mostly political bloggers and they do do stray far from that scene..."
"If you're looking for readership...will not happen."
"...your blog deals with a specific topic with a specific appeal..."
"...perhaps bloggers who have the same interest as you do..."
"...group is not quite a good fit for your blog."
I guess I could have misunderstood it, like you said. I thought it was pretty clear.
I just took it to mean, "You are wring about personality assessments..? Our interest is in more important things, like politics. I really don't think our bloggers would give you the time of day (because I know exactly what the 60 some people in the group are interested in and can predict what they will and will not like). Go find your own kind."
My brain sometimes goes into this interpretation mode and hear cynicism where none may be intended. (but it's hard to know for sure, isn't it?) Hmmm... I wonder what preference that fits in with?
Thanks for being level-headed!
I typically see cynicism in those who prefer Introversion with Thinking (IxTx), and in particular those with Introvered Thinking (Ti, or the MBTI code (xxTP). Ti is critical thinking, basically an attempt to prove everything wrong to whittle away to what is actually right.
ReplyDeletemichael J pastor- what a great insight on the Ti and skeptical thinking. I would actually say, though, that I think a J preference would add to that because J's can rush to judgement. It's almost like we need to make a decision about how we feel about things to check it off of our mental list. IXTJ would be the most skeptical in my mind. (so says the ISTJ! HA!)
ReplyDeleteMy boyfriend is an ENTP and is one of the most skeptical/cynical people I know. I don't know where that comes from for him. He often makes assumptions about people's motivations and I stop him and ask him how he came to that conclusion. It's usually the N dominating his thinking there. He relates what one person is doing to what he's seen/imagined someone else doing. It bothers me as an S. I'll say "you are making that assumption based on what evidence?" He has no idea what I mean! :)
being skeptical and rushing to judgment are NOT necessarily the same thing! Skepticism is caution, not quick decision making. When we say "rushing to judgment" we're usually talking in terms of a final call and a cause/effect relationship, which is the bailiwick of the extraverted judgment function. If anything, being critical shows at least part of the reason why P types takes so long to make a decision - besides gathering more information, their judgment is finding the flaws in each decision they generate through extraverted perception. It doesn't take any time at all to come up with criticism of something, particularly if you are a TP.
ReplyDeleteYour boyfriend is a xxTP, and it's the TP combo that lends itself to cynicism and criticism. Also note that he's attempting to use Feeling when you note "He often makes assumptions about people's motivations and I stop him and ask him how he came to that conclusion." Personal motivation usually indicates Introverted Feeling (xxFP) [but can also be reflective of xxFJ] and ENTPs are NOT particularly good at feeling (or computer interfaces would be a lot nicer!) So yes, it's partly his Ne dominant at work, but what's really at work is his *lack* of Feeling. [Disclaimer about mistaking a preference for one as a lack of another inserted here] ;-) By the way, only Sensors need actual evidence when it comes to figuring things out :-P nyah nyah nyah
Just real quick. I don't think type alone has near the impact as world view.
ReplyDeleteTo me, all of politics springs from your world view: What is the proper role of government? When is it OK to curtail the rights of individuals to benefit the collective? How do you draw the line between liberty and pragmatism? Where do human rights come from?
The answer to all of those questions is going to come from how, at your very core, you think about the world, yourself, other people, morality and everything else.
This is actually why I hate politics. Everyone pretends that what is most important is how well you can "govern" or "command". Certainly the Presidents role as Commander-in-Chief is very sobering, but the search for candidates is complex and heavily nuanced.
This election is not really about qualifications or experience. This election is about ideology and confidence.
The information gained about candidates is not sought to help the American people truly make an informed decision, it is put out to hurt the ability of the other side to make a credible case to the swing voters.
All the talk about bridges and babies and domestic terrorists and funny money - it is all designed to pressure people to make a decision based on pseudo evidence instead of emotion.
The people that like Candidate X like them because they see alignment - with experience or beliefs or values - something that gives the citizens a strong feeling that this candidate is the one they should vote for.
The dirt and accusations are designed to manipulate you into voting for someone based on a false construct - that being more X (patriotic, stable, moral, experienced, compassionate, brave, maverick, etc) is somehow a more legitimate qualification than the ones that stir you emotionally.
The fact is, I would vote for an inexperienced person who shared my values over someone who was highly accomplished but actively opposed the causes I believe in - and I think most Americans would agree with me here. Better to live with the mistakes of inexperience than the competency of those you oppose.
Linda, sorry to tell you this, but a bunch of politicos do not want to talk about type - what they want to do is talk about issues from the frame of their unexamined bias so they can continue to feel "right" and "smart" while "proving" that the other side is "evil" and "wrong".
MBTI requires a level of self examination that many people are not willing to perform. It is too uncomfortable and too scary - much safer and much more fun to just flock with your own kind and rant about how wrong everyone else is.
This behavior is universal among humans and can be seen in all races, religions, political affiliations and even appears in things like sports and leisure. It is who we are as a species - tribal, competitive and contentious.
"in my opinion..."
David - "Just real quick. I don't think type alone has near the impact as world view."
ReplyDeleteBut david, your world view is formed partly from your type. If you go to politicaltypes.com or openpolitics.ca you'll see the correlations. In case of the latter, many of their scales correspond directly to Jungian Dichotomies.
A lack of self-examination is something that Jung directly spoke to, relegating everything that we don't wish to discuss to the Shadow, our non preffered functions.
Your statement "The people that like Candidate X like them because they see alignment - with experience or beliefs or values - something that gives the citizens a strong feeling that this candidate is the one they should vote for." speaks directly to Type alignment!
Breanne said,
ReplyDeleteHe often makes assumptions about people's motivations
I do that too! But us ENTPs know that those assumptions turn out to be correct more often than not... It's those few "not" occasions that are problematic, however. :-(
Michael said,
"Personal motivation usually indicates Introverted Feeling (xxFP) [but can also be reflective of xxFJ] and ENTPs are NOT particularly good at feeling (or computer interfaces would be a lot nicer!) So yes, it's partly his Ne dominant at work, but what's really at work is his *lack* of Feeling. [Disclaimer about mistaking a preference for one as a lack of another inserted here]"
So do you mean to say that when we make assumptions about other people's motivations, that comes from an ENTP's inability to relate to the feeling deciding function of the other person? Therefore making the wrong assumption? Or do you mean that since the ENTP's F function is underdeveloped, we may be making a sloppy F judgment?
I understand the TP explanation regarding criticism, and I agree with you that TPs can be more skeptical than TJs. I always have to test/re-test, probe/re-probe everything, which drives my husband nuts. He (ISTJ) is usually satisfied with a single confirmation/affirmation.
David said,
ReplyDelete"what they want to do is talk about issues from the frame of their unexamined bias so they can continue to feel "right" and "smart" while "proving" that the other side is "evil" and "wrong".
Sounds a LOT like religion, doesn't it? ;-) Ha! And I say that as a Christian. I see many similarities between politics and religion. and atheism as well. and... education. parenting. science ...and even psychology sometimes.
Of course, I am the exception, because I know I'm right. Oh, and everyone who's on my side... ;-)
Michael,
ReplyDeleteOf course type is going to have an impact on world view and values, but in my opinion, the end result is the cocktail of type, parental influence and environment.
In my experience, NT's tend to be less religious and more aligned with the left leaning political movements.
One reason I think this happens:
My guess would be that many NTs are raised by SJ/SP types that struggle to reconcile the questions of faith with the rational mind.
As the NTs mature and are not given an adequate intellectual foundation, they are more likely to see human failures and inconsistencies as proofs against faith and seek new avenues for meaning and significance.
The same situation might have a different result in an SJ type finding security in shared beliefs and a predictable, structured subculture where they understand what is expected of them.
Same environment, different outcome. In that sense, I agree that type influences world view, but type in and of its self is an empty canvas until it is applied in a human life.
What I would find objectionable is people inferring that any one type is naturally more conservative or more liberal or ascribing any other sort of membership as the natural state of a given type because there are cultural and sociological variable at play and those can change over time which, I believe, would alter the survey results.
David,
ReplyDelete"Of course type is going to have an impact on world view and values, but in my opinion, the end result is the cocktail of type, parental influence and environment."
Of course it is! Type is never the end-all and be-all. Type *influences* everything, but it isn't the *cause* of everything. Type is a dynamic system.
Your expression of your type is also influenced by your environment.
"The answer to all of those questions is going to come from how, at your very core, you think about the world, yourself, other people, morality and everything else."
And Type influences all of those!
"In that sense, I agree that type influences world view, but type in and of its self is an empty canvas until it is applied in a human life."
And is exactly how Jung thought of it, especially when conjoined with his view of Archetypes.
"What I would find objectionable is people inferring that any one type is naturally more conservative or more liberal or ascribing any other sort of membership as the natural state of a given type because there are cultural and sociological variable at play and those can change over time which, I believe, would alter the survey results."
And nobody is arguing with you about that - but Si dominants are naturally more conservative but don't have to end up being Conservative.
I think you're creating an argument where there isn't one.
Lack of dissent is insufficient cause to cease arguing.
ReplyDelete:)
"Lack of dissent is insufficient cause to cease arguing."
ReplyDeleteHaha. So very true... spoken like a true NT!