On: How a middle aged CS major debunked a classic posi...

[wmil]

This seems like the perfect time to pull out the old phrase:

"All models are wrong. Some models are useful."

Big 5 seems useful.

[setgree → wmil]

When I cite such things, it's because "all models are wrong, but mine are useful" :)

And yeah I think big five is useful in the above context, and also for things like this: https://arnoldkling.substack.com/p/keeping-up-with-the-fits-...

"Empirically, men and women to tend to differ on the trait that personality psychology calls agreeableness. More women show up as high in agreeableness than men.

[As an aside, I once wrote Nassim Taleb and the Disagreeables.

Nassim Taleb’s latest book heaps praise on the trait that personality psychologists call low agreeableness. . . I am pretty far out on the disagreeable end of the spectrum myself, but Taleb makes me look like a goody two-shoes.

Taleb came across the essay and tweeted this response:

There is this BS in this "disagreebleness" scale used by psychologists, unconditional of domain. Like most psych categorizations, BS. Many are socially gentle but intellectually rigorous & no-nonsense: others nasty in person but appear gentle in public . BS!

I rest my case.]"

[karpierz → wmil]

Useful for what?

[wmil → karpierz]

People need to understand that different personality types exist and have some idea about the different traits that people have.

It's common to assume everyone thinks like you, then to read spite into their actions.

Here's a good article loosely related: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/baTWMegR42PAsH9qJ/generalizi...