Index › Forums › General Psychology › Who are you, really? The puzzle of personality | Brian Little › Reply To: Who are you, really? The puzzle of personality | Brian Little
- Type: NeFi
- Development: l---
- Attitude: Unseelie
I do know people who swear up and down that they have certain personality traits. Usually for the typical reasons i.e. they’re introverted because they feel like antisocial weirdos, they’re intuitive because they don’t want to be boring, they’re thinkers because they don’t want to be stupid or are capable of complex analysis, etc etc.
This Brian Little guy, although clearly a TeSi, could very well be introverted according to Big Five, since the original Big Five model really only seems to be measuring social introversion. Anyone subscribing to the Big Five model probably won’t have the same perspective on certain personality traits as you or many others who are into other forms of (Jungian) typology.
I would have to agree with you in general as far as Big Five goes. However, because it is done in a scientific way, it obviously sees some use by psychologists, particularly when it comes to diagnosing personality disorders. As a side note, Jordan Peterson seems to be trying to use his success to popularize the theory and get ordinary people to take the test on his website. Furthermore he seems to present a model that is really more of a Big Ten than a Big Five, dividing each trait into two sub-traits.
Extraversion is divided into Enthusiasm (closer to what we might call cognitive extraversion) and Assertiveness (more like social extraversion). This addresses the cognitive/social dilemma.
Neuroticism is divided into Withdrawal (the tendency to avoid in the face of uncertainty) and Volatility (the tendency to become irritable and upset when things go wrong). This adresses an issue I have noticed where introverts score relatively low on “neuroticism” despite being very neurotic, because they are not as “volatile” in their behavior, even when they are emotionally or psychologically unsettled.
This “Big Ten” approach seems to largely solve a lot of the issues with the original Big Five, although perhaps not completely.