Personality traits are primitive emotions made reasonable: premeditated to be viable in the long term & over broad circumstances. A person's dominant trait changes only under stress, mostly before adulthood, so you should be familiar with all these types from high school (giving enough observational data to render controlled experiments redundant). All these traits have existed (@ least) throughout recorded history. But due to societal pressures & lack of availability, not everyone's vocation matches their personality; so the above traits may refer instead to an avocation. Most jobs & personalities have prioritized mixtures of traits.
A person's philosophy is a statement of their personality. This means not only ethics, but also epistemology -- their definition of truth/reasoning. This is why political/religious differences have no logical resolution. (Just as it's pointless to have a debate, e.g., on whether chocolate or vanilla is "better" based on nutritional or financial data.)
This "stratigraphic" ordering also matches educational level, as knowledge in a society increases with time (apparent "dark ages" notwithstanding). Correspondingly, there is an increase in education required in going from manual/clerical work ("things"), to dealing with other people, to intellectual endeavors ("ideas"). Within these 3 divisions, there is subdivision for "aggressive/passive" (or "subjective/objective") attitudes, as greater knowledge is required to understand the world than to assert oneself. Polls show a correlation between educational level & politics (@ least with respect to progressive vs. conservative).
The emphasis on knowledge makes this a level-6 oriented ordering; other orderings (or lack thereof) follow from different levels of view: E.g., a deteriorationist (like Hesiod) might claim this table is better represented upside-down.
|to same level (+)||to other levels (−)|
|2||loyal, dutiful, respectful|
|fearful, slavish, dupe|
| power ⎧
|monotheism (super parent)||2|
|polytheism (super α-dog)||1|
Relative terms, chronologically: "conservative (right)" for earlier, "progressive (left)" for later. ("Liberal" & "libertarian" are also used oppositely, but switch roles in Europe vs. the United States.) Misnomers: Soviet "Socialist" ("Communist"), like National "Socialist" (Nazi), is authoritarian (2), not socialist (4), & thus right of capitalist (3).
I added a level "0" for no/pre-personality, sometimes confused with level 1.
In the corresponding Neolithic prehistory, villages were homogeneous in lifestyle & architecture, with a subsistence economy, & thus not "true societies" (civilization).
|society only||society & individual||individual only|
|Marx →||Heard (4) →||Graves (5) ←||Maslow (4) ←||Spranger (2) →||Guilford →||Roe →||Holland|
|6||7 cognitive (theoretic,|
|scientific||3 sciences||5 investigative|
2 esthetic (beauty)
|5 leptoid||5|6 sociocentric|
|3 social (love)||social|
|8 service||3 social|
|4 humanic||4|5 materialistic|
|4 esteem||3 political (power)||business||7 business|
|3 ascetic||3|4 saintly (security)|
-|2 traditional (safety)
|3 belonging (group)|
2 safety (security)
|4 religious (God)||clerical||6 organization||1 conventional|
|2 heroic||2|3 survival|
(might is right)
|1 coconscious||1 physiological||1 physiological||1 economic|
Each author's level of view (when it affects their hierarchy) is given next to their name. (Not all scientists have 6 as their dominant level.) Their own ordering is indicated by numbering in the body of the table, but circular orderings have no true origin nor orientation.
`… the limit to which the "pure" scientist approaches is not an Einstein or a Newton but rather the Nazi "scientist" of the concentration-camp experiments or the "mad" scientist of Hollywood. … Science for science’s sake can be just as sick as art for art’s sake.'So much for his "positive theory of motivation".
(GED = General Educational Development tests, |
Cx = Cognitive Complexity)
|Fiske →||Lee (2)||Peterson & Seligman (2) →||Roth (1)|
|6||wisdom and knowledge|
|5||openness to |
| amity (communes,|
temperance (self control)
There are also many "binary" classifications of personalities (some of which include neuroticism) as one pole or the other of various traits. These miss seeing any correlations in these traits.
In 1967 I based my model on my interpretation of the models I had seen, which were Marx & the earlier version of Graves, but later found these other models support it (to varying degrees). However, unlike my model, none of these people