I'll note for the purpose of avoiding selection bias that while the archetype I got was directionally correct, a lot of the description was off (as it tends to be with most personality tests).
Had a deep revelation with this test more accurate than anything I’ve ever taken. Appreciate the write up this is the scariest personality quiz ever indeed. Checked out your twitter and found some interesting thoughts as well, followed and subscribed
Hey, I just want to say take care. Mania can coexist with other developments in one's life. I love that you are silencing an inner critic, and making strides in your life. But I want to share that I had a similar moment in my life, and my mania managed to derail some of my progress by sneaking into my life at the same time. Beware of fixation beyond the utility of what's in front of you.
Thank you for your insight and kind concern. I am keeping a close eye out. If you have a twitter account I would be more than happy to discuss the details of your situation by DM and see if there's anything for me to learn.
If it has been useful to you, it has served its purposed. You do well in sharing it as it may be useful to many others as well.
In any case, I can't help but feel like the questions are simplistic and unclear. The archetypes' descriptions remind me too much of the astrology section in a pop maganize, they're vague enough to apply to anyone under certain circumstances. But again, even astrology is useful - many would argue for it, anyway.
My main reservation with the Eristics tests is it doesn't improve on the Big 5, or seem to stray far from Miggs-Breyers, where the test simply parrots back at you precisely what you told it. Unfortunatley, I guess that's the case for most personality tests, uh?
I can understand this perspective, which many have advanced in recent days. To be honest, the real reason I love this test -- other than the extreme predictive value on myself which may not generalize to others -- is the beautiful mathematical structure, and the way it seems to derive almost ab initio from evolutionary considerations. Self/world/society x protect/expand seem like a catalogue of the primal moves a social organism can make on the evolutionary chessboard.
"real reason I love this test (...) is the beautiful mathematical structure"
- I find this very insightful. These are just models after all. What matters most is which one can you leverage the best, not which one has had a greater success in peer review studies. The best map is the one you can read!
Good article and thank you for sharing your personal experience.
I'll note for the purpose of avoiding selection bias that while the archetype I got was directionally correct, a lot of the description was off (as it tends to be with most personality tests).
For a coarse model like this, I think it'll get a lot of deep description wrong, and needs to be nuanced to get more accurate. You may enjoy reading about my next steps here https://renormalize.substack.com/p/eristics-as-a-formal-scientific-theory
Found myself to be the Architect. Thanks for sharing!
Scientists and architects may enjoy the follow-up https://renormalize.substack.com/p/eristics-as-a-formal-scientific-theory
Had a deep revelation with this test more accurate than anything I’ve ever taken. Appreciate the write up this is the scariest personality quiz ever indeed. Checked out your twitter and found some interesting thoughts as well, followed and subscribed
Interesting- I think I'll have to look more into this, maybe the e-book as well. I got scientist.
Scientists may enjoy this follow-up! https://renormalize.substack.com/p/eristics-as-a-formal-scientific-theory
Hey, I just want to say take care. Mania can coexist with other developments in one's life. I love that you are silencing an inner critic, and making strides in your life. But I want to share that I had a similar moment in my life, and my mania managed to derail some of my progress by sneaking into my life at the same time. Beware of fixation beyond the utility of what's in front of you.
Thank you for your insight and kind concern. I am keeping a close eye out. If you have a twitter account I would be more than happy to discuss the details of your situation by DM and see if there's anything for me to learn.
If it has been useful to you, it has served its purposed. You do well in sharing it as it may be useful to many others as well.
In any case, I can't help but feel like the questions are simplistic and unclear. The archetypes' descriptions remind me too much of the astrology section in a pop maganize, they're vague enough to apply to anyone under certain circumstances. But again, even astrology is useful - many would argue for it, anyway.
My main reservation with the Eristics tests is it doesn't improve on the Big 5, or seem to stray far from Miggs-Breyers, where the test simply parrots back at you precisely what you told it. Unfortunatley, I guess that's the case for most personality tests, uh?
PS: If this is something that interests you, you'd probabely enjoy Dynomight's takes... https://dynomight.net/in-defense-of-myers-briggs.html
I can understand this perspective, which many have advanced in recent days. To be honest, the real reason I love this test -- other than the extreme predictive value on myself which may not generalize to others -- is the beautiful mathematical structure, and the way it seems to derive almost ab initio from evolutionary considerations. Self/world/society x protect/expand seem like a catalogue of the primal moves a social organism can make on the evolutionary chessboard.
"real reason I love this test (...) is the beautiful mathematical structure"
- I find this very insightful. These are just models after all. What matters most is which one can you leverage the best, not which one has had a greater success in peer review studies. The best map is the one you can read!
Good article and thank you for sharing your personal experience.
Follow-up https://renormalize.substack.com/p/eristics-as-a-formal-scientific-theory
To The Fixer: pseudonymous is spelled psuedonymous
Thank you!
Scientists may enjoy the follow-up https://renormalize.substack.com/p/eristics-as-a-formal-scientific-theory