# How personality works We often don't know what we ought to do, how to do it, or have the resources to do things, but the most defining factor about whether we'll do something is if we *[want](purpose.md)* to do it, which is heavily defined by our personality. A personality is based on the [experiences](reality.md) we endured and how we responded to them. We have zero control over our upbringing, but we [decided](people-decisions.md) on [changes](people-changes.md) to survive in that environment starting around 6 months old, and we tend to develop that personality with complete independence of our [genetics](people-family.md) starting around the ages of [5 to 10](maturity.md). In many ways, a personality is the closest we can observe as a "[soul](humanity.md)" within others. While the soul itself is more akin to the decisions we make *now*, our personality uses many [mental habits](habits.md) from the past to create a larger [expression](image.md) than the individual moments that make up the individual moments that define who we are at any given second. Our past decisions create a [habitual](habits.md) framework to dictate our preferences in [potential future situations](imagination.md). The cycle of present and past [identities](identity.md) based on our decisions converge together into our general disposition about life. APPLICATION: We can adapt dramatically to our environment, but we'll never like certain things. Each person has different preferences, and those preferences are critical to understanding ourselves and others. It's always better to delegate and [specialize](jobs-specialization.md) than try to be an all-in-one person for all situations. No personality is "best", but each person is "best suited" toward certain times and places based on the [purposes](purpose.md) that can be accomplished. A person can modulate their personality to accommodate specific situations, but it's *very* difficult and is generally unpleasant for everyone involved compared to a more suitable personality. APPLICATION: Each personality is a disposition, so nobody will respond the way we anticipate them to unless we're aware of what their personality is, which is difficult because *they* often aren't aware of what they're really disposed toward. It's difficult to intuitively [classify](logic.md) personality because psychologists are attempting to group the basis for how we make [decisions](people-decisions.md). For this reason, most personality indicators and tests are vaguely close to reality but always miss certain elements. The only exception to this is the Big 5 personality indicator, which is the only one with any [scientific rigor](science.md) behind it. Personality carves itself into [5 major classifications (with 2 subclasses)](personality-ocean.md) that conveniently break out into an OCEAN acronym. It typically represents as the [conflict](conflicts-inner.md) between two decisions that have [benefits](meaning.md) and [risks](safety.md), with our [soul's](humanity.md) decisions making the deciding factor that determines how we wish to continue from that point. ## Differences Personality differences can be frustrating, but they're absolutely necessary because each personality is a broadly formed solution to a vast set of problems. No single person is equipped for every situation, and the wide variety of personalities gives different approaches to handling the complex [specializations](jobs-specialization.md) required to [live well](goodlife.md). High openness to experience must respect [convention](habits.md) and [tradition](people-culture.md), and low openness to experience must accept new experiences and take on [new risks](socialrisk.md). High conscientiousness must respect others' differing standards, while low conscientiousness must think more about others. High extraversion must respect that others need alone time, and low extraversion must respect others' need for more social interaction. High agreeableness must discover and enforce their convictions, and low agreeableness must learn to [tactfully](people-3_boundaries.md) respect others and their [views](values.md). High neuroticism must emphasize [healthy boundaries](people-3_boundaries.md), and low neuroticism must be more compassionate for others' [feelings](mind-feelings.md). Regarding [gender](gender.md) differences within personalities, men and women tend to be more alike than different, but there are some distinctions: - Men tend to have *much* lower agreeableness than women, most prominently in the domain of compassion. - Men tend to have lower neuroticism compared to women. ## Mix-and-match In a general sense, all five dimensions can also be lumped together into a super-category: - Extraversion and openness to experience group together to create "Boldness". - Agreeableness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism group together to create "Sociability". Extraversion and agreeableness can be easily confused. Extroversion defines how much a person likes being around other people generally, but agreeableness defines how much someone will like other people individually. A baby's natural tendency to cry will clarify their neuroticism and agreeableness later on in life. The most important indicators of [success](results.md) come firstly through our intellect (the subdomain of openness to experience) because it defines how [creative](mind-creativity.md) our solutions will be, and secondly through conscientiousness because it defines how frequently we'll perform [tasks](results.md) we'd prefer to avoid. However, intelligence and conscientiousness have *zero* statistical connection with one another, likely because smart people can often slip through life without having to follow their [culture's](people-culture.md) [social rules](people-rules.md). Agreeableness and conscientiousness are at constant odds with each other in most social contexts: - Agreeable people typically permit others to take advantage of them until they learn to set good [boundaries](people-boundaries.md), though *enforcing* those boundaries requires conscientiousness. - Conscientious people will naturally sideline agreeableness in pursuit of what they [perceive](image.md) to be right. Personality often has a direct correlation with [political association](politics-conservativeliberal.md): - Conservatives tend to be higher in conscientiousness, especially in orderliness. - Liberals tend to be higher in openness to experience. - On the aspect of agreeableness, liberals tend to be higher in compassion and lower in politeness, and conservatives are the reverse. When choosing a [mate](gender.md) or [leader](groups-small.md), personality is *critical* to finding a good match: - Identical personalities for a [relationship](relationships-marriage.md) are ideal in *all* the aspects (because they share a common [identity](identity.md)) except neuroticism: two emotionally volatile people are *very* dysfunctional and dangerous. However, pairing two people who are *very* similar means a smaller range of [creativity](mind-creativity.md) to find legitimately useful [solutions](purpose.md). - While [hiring people](mgmt-1_why.md) should be based at least somewhat on conscientiousness, this is *especially* true for managers who [direct other people](groups-small.md). However, the appearance of most leaders demonstrates through assertiveness, which often creates [awful social systems](mgmt-badsystems.md) if the appointing leaders aren't careful. - For [creative](mind-creativity.md) solutions (e.g., [writers](stories.md), [entertainers](stories-storytellers.md), [artists](mind-creativity.md)), look for low-conscientiousness people, since they don't obsess about following existing [constraints](people-rules.md). Our [self-esteem](identity.md) is essentially our extraversion (as a positive emotional state) minus our neuroticism (as a negative emotional state). Most things we call "personality disorders" are simply the combination of personality characteristics that create adverse [consequences](results.md) for society: - Cluster A personality disorders (paranoid personality disorder, schizoid/schizotypal personality disorder) are *extremely* high neuroticism without enough conscientiousness to constantly add new [perceptions](image.md) about [reality](reality.md). - Cluster B personality disorders (antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, histrionic personality disorder, narcissistic personality disorder) are the extremes of low conscientiousness and high extraversion. - Cluster C personality disorders break into several domains: - Avoidant personality disorder is high agreeableness and low extraversion. - Dependent personality disorder is high agreeableness and low conscientiousness. - Obsessive-compulsive disorder is low agreeableness and high conscientiousness. - While it's more neurological than personality, the [autism spectrum](https://books2read.com/autism/) is the extremes of extraversion low enough to not detect others' body language, high conscientiousness, and high neuroticism. Beyond that, there are a wide variety of mixtures when these 5 base components fit together into synergies. - Statistically, most people have low conscientiousness and high openness to experience. This makes them very flexible to [adapt](people-changes.md) to changing situations, but comes at the risk of adapting wrongly to a [bad leader](mgmt-badsystems.md). - The [high-risk](socialrisk.md) nature of prolific [artists of all fields](mind-creativity.md) requires them to always be high-neuroticism, no more than moderate agreeableness, and at least moderately conscientious. - [Philosophers](philosophy.md) tend to lean low agreeableness and high openness to experience. Otherwise, they tend to spend less time pondering and run society instead. - Criminals tend to have low agreeableness and low conscientiousness, though [white-collar](jobs-specialization.md) crime can be much broader on the range of conscientiousness. - [Religious](religion.md) leaders (except for [cults](culture-cults.md)) are high conscientiousness and high neuroticism, with [popular](trends.md) religions often having high openness to experience and at least moderate extraversion as well. - Most [large groups](groups-large.md) tailored for [productivity](purpose.md) (e.g., corporations) are literally *run* by high-agreeableness, high-conscientiousness people (especially [women](gender.md)). - People who foster plenty of nostalgia tend to foster [tradition and convention](habits.md), which requires high agreeableness, high conscientiousness, and low openness to experience. - [Funny people](humor.md) are typically high-openness (to see things in a [creative new way](mind-creativity.md)), moderate-agreeableness (to make jokes that involve pain), and low-enough conscientiousness to find comfort in breaking [rules](people-rules.md). - When it comes to conformity, there are four domains based on aggressiveness (agreeableness + extraversion) and mindedness (conscientiousness + openness to experience): 1. Convention-minded and aggressive - The Hall Monitor 2. Convention-minded and passive - The Sheep 3. Independent-minded and aggressive - The Rebel 4. Independent-minded and passive - The Daydreamer - The two forces of high extraversion and high agreeableness can combine to form a false sense of self (described in the next section). Finally, the "energy" of each of the spectra becomes *severe* conflicts when someone happens to have extremes on two or more dimensions. ## Image/shadow For the most (or entire) part, we are [image-based](image.md) people. Our [cultures](people-culture.md) teach us about certain [moral](morality.md) things we must [do](purpose.md), [say](people-conversation.md), [think](understanding.md), and [be](identity.md). We maintain that [image](image.md) of how we expect others to want us to behave, and it forces us to express at *least* two personalities: 1. The way we would behave if nobody was around whatsoever, including the absence of any [god(s)](religion.md) who may see us otherwise. 2. How we believe we must be for others to [accept us](people-boundaries.md), or at least for us to gain [influence](influence.md) and [power](power.md). One consequence of this is that measuring personalities is very difficult. People will often adapt the [image](image.md) of their disposition to whatever they [believe](understanding-certainty.md) to be advantageous at the time. Generally, most cultures form an expected "false self" with a specific range of personality: - Openness to Experience - [adapt and change](people-changes.md) to whatever the group [expects](imagination.md), but never take on enough [risk](socialrisk.md) that may potentially create adverse events for the group. - Conscientiousness - always do what's [right](morality.md), until it doesn't conform with the desires of the highest-ranking [group leader](groups-large.md). - Extraversion - do whatever you want, but always attend required [group events](groups-member.md) and conform to the [cultural mores](people-culture.md) of your group. - Agreeableness - never [disagree](people-conflicts.md) with the group leader and only [politely disagree](people-5_conflicts.md) with others, and [females must be more agreeable than males](gender.md). - Neuroticism - you're free to express your [feelings](mind-feelings.md), up to the point where the group's tasks may be disrupted or will portray an adverse [image](image.md) to others outside the group. Proportional to our *actual* agreeableness, our actions with society's responses create a feedback loop of shame that reinforces and magnifies our "shadow self": 1. We quickly [learn](education.md) to [habitually](habits.md) repress the true desires and [perceptions](image.md) we'd otherwise express. 2. To the degree we can restrain ourselves, we maintain that [image](image.md), but make a lapse in [judgment](people-decisions.md) when we face a severe breakdown of our [willpower](people-decisions.md). These lapses can include a drunken rage, outbursts of anger, unprovoked rude statements, failure to act, or an impulsive and large-scale decision. 3. Typically, most cultures will express the action as shameful and wrong, and we conclude we shouldn't have done it. 4. Upon reflection, we may shows a way for us to try even harder to repress those desires until we face another severe breakdown of our willpower. Most modern [non-medication](body-4_health.md) psychotherapy is devoted to exploring and unpacking [awareness](awareness.md) of these true desires, then shows a way for us to converge all our personality archetypes into a cohesive whole. This is [messy](mind-creativity.md), difficult, and most cultures find it highly [controversial](morality-taboo.md). It's possible that most of the entire [framework of civilization](jobs-specialization.md) would collapse (or at least [restructure](trends.md)) if everyone did it at once. Only a few methods work to "integrate" a shadow, and every healthy solution uses at least some of them, but even the *methods* that resolve the problem are highly controversial: 1. Stop taking yourself seriously, since your [purpose](purpose.md) and [feelings](mind-feelings.md) are determined by severely [limited information](image.md). 2. Apologize sincerely, in the deepest possible desire for repentance, for all misbehavior or misjudgment that potentially [harmed others](morality-evil.md). 3. Maintain a harmonious focus on [loving](people-love.md) yourself and everyone else the same (i.e., love others like yourself). 4. Release *everything* about yourself as a product of the environment that was given to you, minus what you have [control](people-decisions.md) over right now. In practice, all aspects of [identity](identity.md) must come strictly from [decisions](people-decisions.md) you still stand by. Most people will never integrate their shadow, so the ones who succeed tend to [lead groups](groups-small.md) from their enhanced natural connection to themselves. This is *not* a [moral](morality.md) matter either way, but it heavily defines a person's ability to [influence](influence.md) and achieve [meaning](meaning.md). APPLICATION: People who integrate their shadow can be terrifying for those who haven't. They have, in a way, transcended to another [frame](image.md) of existence where their [identity](identity.md) is only contained in who they are instead of the [environment](reality.md) they're in. This arrangement makes it *very* difficult to exercise [raw power](power-types.md) over them, and they can only be influenced via [persuasion](influence.md). If a person who doesn't integrate their shadow is asked to describe the one type of personality they despise the most, they'll likely give a close approximation of their own repressed characteristics. If they *have* integrated their shadow, they'll likely give the *opposite* of their authentic self. APPLICATION: We maintain a public false self alongside our latent shadow self, and most people spend plenty of time obsessing about appearing differently than they actually are. Integrating those two perspectives is critical for living [the good life](goodlife.md), but only by [conforming](habits.md) both those domains to [invariable truth](values.md) and aspiring for [moral goodness](morality.md). ## Adaptation As people, we are *very* versatile and capable of adapting to [purposes](purpose.md) we deem necessary. However, it's *much* easier to adapt the tasks to the personality than the personality to the task. Adapting is proportionally more difficult the farther we go from our natural state (e.g., introvert to extrovert), but we have a *much* easier time tempering our extremes than becoming more extreme on the opposite end. APPLICATION: Every person is different, mostly from their personality. This doesn't make them superior or lesser, but *does* make them more well-fitted to specific [tasks](purpose.md): - Don't ask a high-neuroticism person to do something procedural. - Don't send a high-agreeableness person into a difficult [negotiation](people-conflicts-negotiation.md). - Don't ask a high-conscientiousness person to give a [bribe](legal-safety.md). One of the qualities of someone who integrated their shadow is that they can hold to the qualities of their "natural" self and then, when the situation requires it, summon the qualities of their [habituated](habits.md) "shadow" personalities. ## Personality groups Our [family](people-family.md) has a tiny bearing on our personality based on [biochemistry](science-life-biochem.md) and [culture](people-culture.md). For that reason, every larger group that arose from a family (e.g., most nations) has a specific biochemistry of their mind that influences how they make decisions. These personality archetypes frequently ripple outward to create an entire national identity: - In Europe, Germany has *always* been ambitious. They were responsible for starting both World Wars in the 20th century, and rapidly became the force controlling the European Union by the beginning of the 21st century. - Japan is a fork of risk-taking Chinese who left on ships to find the Fountain of Youth from a mad king's edict. They represent some of Asia's hardest-working and innovative people. - Most of the Middle East is made of close [family](people-family.md) ties, and it demonstrates certain similarities across the entire region. APPLICATION: Nation-states' interactions are large-scale versions of individual interactions from how much [family](people-family.md) defines personality, which is why national [stereotypes](symbols.md) exist. Within [society](jobs-specialization.md), [technology](technology.md) means a higher requirement for the openness to experience dimension, but also comes with more opportunities to [succeed](results.md). This becomes a dramatic political issue among society, and especially impacts people with high conscientiousness and low openness to experience, since their unemployment will create a devastating lack of [meaning](meaning.md) without any [solutions](mind-creativity.md) in sight.