Personality tests: are they baloney?

I've been thinking recently about personality tests (specifically the MBTI): the one I consistently test as is INFP, (wiki) (maybe I should quit science and become a social worker...). Reading the descriptions of that type, I have to admit that it sounds awfully familiar. When I read the description of the exact opposite type: ESTJ, it was pretty clear that I'm not anything like that. One letter switches from INFP tend to look fairly familiar to me also. So there certainly seems to be some validity to personality tests (this has also been shown in the scientific literature), they measure something, even if it's not always clear exactly what. However, I think people need to be very careful with interpretation and application of the results of personality tests, and not take them too seriously. You are precisely who you are, and not precisely who some silly test says you are!

Poetry as a force of destruction

This is an essay about the limitations of poetry and the potential for the poetic process to destroy the information it intends to preserve. I think the ideas could also be applied to other forms of art. I wrote it in January of 2011, and revised it just now. I don't think this is by any means the last word on this subject (it's barely even the first word), and I welcome discussion.

What is exciting?

I apologize in advance if this reads like an exercise in self indulgence. I wrote this after a conversation with a friend which basically went like this:

Her: "I'm going to go whitewater rafting next month, doesn't that sound exciting!"
Me: "Kind of. I think it would be more exciting to sit under a tree and read a good book, though."
Her: "What!? That doesn't make any sense."

It made perfect sense to me, so I wrote this essay and sent it to her. And now I'm posting it here for my throng of fans to read:

What is exciting? White water rafting?  Paragliding? Sky diving? Bungee-jumping? Roller coasters? Motorcycles? These things are exciting. They are fun (at least those of these that I have experienced).  But it is a short-lived excitement.  It’s there, and then it’s gone.

To me, a deeper kind of excitement, one that lasts, one that I can return to again and again, comes from learning.  Any idea that changes my perspective on the world or deepens my understanding is an exciting idea.  It’s an idea that makes my heart beat faster.

Smaller is Better: Iceland and the American Dream

           Iceland is a small and ancient nation, first colonized near the year 870 A.D. (1), that has preserved its culture and language for more than a millennium and, despite the recent turmoil, today enjoys one of the highest standards of living in the world.  The United States by contrast is a huge nation, the third largest population in the world (2).  Despite their differences, the U.S. and Iceland have many parallels in terms of why they were founded and the goals of the people who subsequently moved there: the Icelandic Dream of the Viking immigrant is similar to the American Dream of the pilgrim, the poor European, the Chinese laborer, and all the other immigrants to America.  Both nations were founded by independent minded people seeking new lands for farming, opportunities for upward social mobility, and an alternative to the oppressive monarchical societies of their countries of origin (3, 4 p. 89).  Both established representative government at times when such governments were rare in the world.  Iceland’s low population has been both an asset and a detriment to its ability to facilitate the Icelandic Dream.  The U.S. is in the fortunate position of having an overarching federal government with subordinate Iceland-sized municipal and state governments.  By taking into account the ways in which small government has been a boon for Iceland as well as the ways in which it has been a challenge, the U.S. can more optimally divide power among its different levels of government.

Iceland: The Problem of Sustainability in an International Economy

In a world of rapidly increasing numbers of people and rapidly decreasing amounts of natural resources, sustainable resource management is one of the most important problems currently facing humanity.  The country of Iceland is a small country that, throughout its history, has been forced to come to terms with the limitations of its own resources (1).  In some ways, Iceland can be viewed as a microcosm for the world, except, for the time being, on a more extreme level.  While in much of the developed world the problem of unsustainability is not yet a pressing issue in people’s everyday lives, in Iceland the entire national economy hinges on the continued health of its fragile fisheries, so stewardship of marine resources is a top priority for all Icelanders.  Another way Iceland is a smaller, more extreme model for the world is in the recent economic crash, which hit Iceland particularly hard.  Some Icelandic strategies for sustainability may be applicable on a more global scale, but in the long term they will prove insufficient for both Iceland and for the world.

Joan of Arc and Martin Luther

            Their births separated by 71 years and about 400 miles, Joan of Arc and Martin Luther may seem an unlikely pair to compare.  Joan was an illiterate who was executed at the age of 19; Luther was an academic who knew at least four languages and at 19 had no idea he was destined to become a monk, let alone a monk who would change the world.  Despite their differences, Luther and Joan were similar in their unshakable faith in God and their dogged determination to follow God’s will rather than the will of earthly authorities.

Was Machiavelli a Christian?

Machiavelli was certainly a humanist (in the Renaissance sense) and possibly a Christian, but probably not a Roman Catholic.  Machiavelli wrote as though he were a Christian and respected the spiritual authority of the papacy.  His short work An Exhortation to Penitence, in which he espouses humility, charity, and obedience to God, at first glance seems to be a clear endorsement of Christianity.  But for Machiavelli, endorsement does not imply adherence.  Machiavelli wanted desperately to see Italy unite and return to the glories of the Roman republic.  Encouraging religious unity was one way he could contribute towards that goal.