Take Free Advanced Big 45 Personality Testpersonality tests by similarminds.com
Advanced Big 45 Personality Test Results
|Gregariousness ||||||||||| ||30% |
|Sociability ||||||||||| ||22% |
|Assertiveness |||||||||||||| ||38% |
|Poise ||||||||||||||||| ||42% |
|Leadership ||||||||||| ||30% |
|Provocativeness ||||||||||||||||| ||46% |
|Self-Disclosure ||||||||||||||||| ||50% |
|Talkativeness ||||||||||||||||||||||| ||66% |
|Group Attachment ||||||||||| ||26% |
|Extroversion |||||||||||||| ||38% |
|Understanding |||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||74% |
|Warmth ||||||||||||||||||||||| ||62% |
|Morality ||||||||||||||||||||||| ||62% |
|Pleasantness ||||||||||||||||||||||| ||70% |
|Empathy |||||||||||||||||||| ||54% |
|Cooperation |||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||74% |
|Sympathy |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||82% |
|Tenderness |||||||||||||||||||| ||54% |
|Nurturance ||||||||||||||||||||||| ||66% |
|Friendliness ||||||||||||||||||||||| ||66% |
|Conscientiousness ||||||||||| ||22% |
|Efficiency ||||||||||| ||22% |
|Dutifulness ||||||||||||||||| ||50% |
|Purposefulness ||||||||||| ||22% |
|Organization |||||||||||||| ||34% |
|Cautiousness ||||||||||| ||22% |
|Rationality |||||||||||||| ||38% |
|Perfectionism ||||||||||| ||22% |
|Orderliness |||||||| ||14% |
|Orderliness ||||||||||| ||27% |
|Stability |||||||||||||||||||| ||54% |
|Happiness ||||||||||||||||| ||50% |
|Calmness ||||||||||||||||||||||| ||70% |
|Moderation ||||||||||||||||||||||| ||62% |
|Toughness |||||||||||||||||||| ||58% |
|Impulse Control ||||||||||||||||| ||46% |
|Imperturbability ||||||||||||||||| ||46% |
|Cool-headedness ||||||||||||||||||||||| ||70% |
|Tranquility |||||||||||||| ||38% |
|Emotional Stability |||||||||||||||||||| ||54% |
|Intellect |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||90% |
|Ingenuity |||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||74% |
|Reflection |||||||||||||||||||| ||58% |
|Competence |||||||||||||||||||| ||58% |
|Quickness ||||||||||||||||||||||| ||66% |
|Introspection |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||86% |
|Creativity |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||86% |
|Imagination |||||||||||||||||||| ||58% |
|Depth |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||82% |
|Openmindedness |||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||73% |
|W|P|109021599346077719|W|P|more fun with personality tests.|W|P|7/21/2004 12:48:00 AM|W|P|7/21/2004 01:04:00 AM|W|P|PJ|W|P|Well, dictionary.com says it is, but it is one butt-ugly word, ain't it?7/22/2004 12:50:00 AM|W|P|7/22/2004 12:51:00 AM|W|P|7/18/2004 01:11:00 PM|W|P|PJ|W|P|Thomas Frank drops the knowledge in the New York Times.
I have, for years, played footsy with the theory that important people in the Republican party are toying with the Christian right--feeding them a nonstop series of meaningless gestures to keep the mouthbreathers pacified while the grownups get down to the serious work of dismantling the capital-gains tax, weakening environmental regulations, etc.
Of course, as Frank notes, an actual victory for the culture warriors on school prayer or abortion or gay marriage or whatever is one less shiny object they can use to distract the hoi polloi. So it is not only important that such initiatives be proposed, it is just as important that they be rejected.
There's a danger in taking this line of reasoning too far--it's easy to hear that and not fear for the future of the Republic, because, hey, the worst excesses of the Republican elite are just window-dressing.
But consider: these symbolic defeats are not just in the service of distracting the simpleminded from the substantive issues of the day. The greater purpose is to create an ongoing meta-story of American politics. This story, in Frank's words, tells us "that the country is run by liberals; that the world is unfair; that the majority is persecuted by a sinister elite." These meta-stories have consequences down the line--consequenes that the initial tellers cannot always forsee. The conservative meta-story of Vietnam--that we would have won but for the weak-kneed politicians and nosy reporters and pinko intellectual snot kids--has had a profound effect not only on contemporary political narrative but also on honest-to-God policy decisions in, say, Iraq: viz., rampant paranoia about the press, a high-handed disdain for legislative or judicial inquiry into the warmaking process, a total rejection of the opinions of countless experts and academics, etc.
Perhaps these attitudes are a result of our nation's leaders genuinely believing their own press releases. Perhaps one generation's myths have become another generation's facts. Perhaps they do know better but can't afford to rock the boat, politically speaking. Regardless of the motives of the people who put them there, when soldiers start coming home in boxes, it's hard to continue to think of the process as merely absurdist political theater.|W|P|109017737343471795|W|P|gay marriage and political narrative|W|P|7/18/2004 03:27:00 AM|W|P|PJ|W|P|Let us set aside the question of whether it's morally defensible to kick felons (who have served their time) off the voting rolls in the first place.
Let us set aside the question of whether it's practically prudent for county boards to use a purported list of felons, the construction of which a bipartisan commission calls negligent at best.
I have a more nitty-gritty-type question in mind. Why (he asked sweetly and innocently) are the same people who four years ago were so upset by the danger to equal protection inherent in different Florida counties having different ballot-counting standards so seemingly OK with some counties using an obviously flawed and incomplete list to purge their voter rolls?
|W|P|109013996023523271|W|P|a disingenuous question that's still worth asking|W|P|7/18/2004 02:39:00 AM|W|P|PJ|W|P|number of different beds the author has slept in during the last week: 6
number of days this week that the author has slept in the bed that most accurately can be called "his": 1
number of times the author has been in a non-standard sleeping arrangement due to the suggestion of or invitation to same by an authentic and presentable-looking human female: 4
number of different authentic and presentable-looking human females in question: 4
number of times said sleeping arrangements have involved sharing a room with said females: 3
number of times said sleeping arrangements have involved sharing a bed with said females: 2
number of instances of actual romantic and/or erotic activity on the author's part during the course of this week: 0
|W|P|109013703781061459|W|P|not a complaint. merely an observation.|W|P|7/15/2004 04:59:00 PM|W|P|PJ|W|P||W|P|108992878359496415|W|P|bleh|W|P|7/14/2004 04:08:00 PM|W|P|PJ|W|P|Red or Blue�Which Are You? - Take the Slate quiz. By Anne E. Kornblut
I'm pretty much smack dab in the middle, which leads me to think that the quiz is failing in its stated goal, because my correct red answers (e.g., I know who Lee Greenwood is, I could tell you off the top of my head which schools are in the Big 12, etc.) are not at all reflective of the background noise of my surrounding community, which is one of the "bluest" towns in all of Flyover Country.
Some strangeness: why does knowing where Door County is make you a red-stater? [Door County is a Wisconsin vacation destination, and I would reckon that 90-95% of the people who visit it are from Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, and Iowa, all of which are "blue states," even if many of their residents are not "blue-state" people.] Likewise, is it incriminatingly "red" to know the names of the Quad Cities? (Gore, incidentally, carried all of the Quad Cities' counties in 2000, which are located between blue-state Illinois and blue-state Iowa.)
Maybe I'm overthinking what is, after all, intended to be a bit of fun. But what frustrates me about the more glib and simplistic varieties of the red America-blue America hypothesis is that it lacks predictive power: your cultural touchstones are, at best, a rough guideline to how you'll vote or even as to where you live. (I'm not the only blue person living in a blue place who knows this stuff; anyone from hippy-dippy Austin, TX knows damn well that the 'Horns never play Indiana State.) This is especially frustrating because, beneath all the cutesy anecdotes, there's an interesting question to be pondered: why is it that a significant voting block in the left-of-center Democratic Party are well-to-do professionals, and why is it that a significant voting block in the right-of-center Republican party are working class folks?|W|P|108983928135602280|W|P|cool toy|W|P|10/08/2005 08:27:00 PM|W|P|Jim Naka|W|P|Hi i am totally blown away with the blogs people have created its so much fun to read alot of good info and you have also one of the best blogs !! Have some time check my link of kid toy.7/13/2004 03:11:00 PM|W|P|PJ|W|P|SI.com - Writers - Verducci: Handicapping the second half - Tuesday July 13, 2004 12:56PM
This article is pitched as "Fearless Predictions" on the front page of SI.com, but the predictions themselves are almost comically timorous. Though the first half of the article talks about how many current playoff-race leaders could possibly end up on the outside looking in, when the writer actually commits himself, he predicts no imminent demise of the Yankees or Cardinals, picks the division-leading White Sox to win the AL Central, picks the A's to overcome their mammoth two-game lead in the AL West, and makes no predictions whatsoever in the NL East and West.
Hey, Tom, it won't kill ya to go out on a little tiny limb. Promise.|W|P|108974946379759074|W|P|fear|W|P|7/13/2004 02:38:00 PM|W|P|PJ|W|P|Chicago Tribune | Ditka tells GOP he's game
In a way, because I love political theater, I'm kind of rooting for this to happen. But that's counterbalanced by my terror at the mere possibility that he might, you know, win.
For my part, I was just going on ten years old when the Bears won the Super Bowl, so I was at the perfect age to worship all things '85 Bears, and I drank deep from the well.
[For people who aren't from Chicago or are Chicagoans of recent vintage, it's hard to remember how epochal the Bears Super Bowl win really was. The Cubs and White Sox are, of course, legendary in their historical mediocrity, the Bulls were pretty much a civic joke, and the Blackhawks hadn't lifted a Cup since the Sixties. The baseball teams teased us in '83 and '84, but actual major sport championships? The last was in 1963. This town was so starved for a winner that there was a downtown ticker-tape parade for the Sting--who, bless their souls, were a soccer team. Additionally, the '85 Bears had an abundance of "personalities," including Ditka himself, whose penchant for obnoxious bluster was a lot more palatable in the service of a trophy-winning team. It also didn't hurt--and I hesitate to bring this up but candor compels me--that many of those personalities were of a distinctly pale hue, which I think helped a lot of people wholeheartedly embrace the team. Chicago, in its way, was (and to a lesser extent is) as racist as any place in America, and Ditka played the image of the team as a bunch of hard-working "Grabowskis" for all it was worth, an image the public was eager to embrace in the Washington-Vyrdoliak-Byrne years of outright racial warfare in government. ("Hard-working" being often deployed by sportswriters and fans as a racial codeword, embracing the myth-story that white athletes are get where they are through pluck, hard work and the American way while black athletes are merely touched by God.) Even to this day, civic adulation and media mini-stardom has been suspiciously more forthcoming for the white '85 Bears than for the black ones--who, with the excepion of Payton, the Fridge, and maybe Singletary, were commonly regarded as interchangeable parts.]
The years, however, have not been kind to Mike Ditka, who went on to win another two (2) playoff games in his remaining seven (7) years with the team, and he is not the secular Chicago saint he once was, which is part of why I'm skeptical of his ability to actually win a Senate seat. There is the aforementioned penchant for bluster, the subneanderthal political views, and the fact that--how shall I say this?--Mr. Ditka is not the brightest candle in the menorah. So I'm still confident of an Obama win. But Ditka seems like a more viable Republican candidate than many of the names being bandied around.|W|P|108974753184912989|W|P|ditka! consternation! uproar!|W|P|7/13/2004 06:00:00 AM|W|P|PJ|W|P|A Blind Date Of The Damned, courtesy of Write On, Megs, via Unfogged.
Every time I get to feeling crappy about my mediocre writing skillz and my dim future economic prospects, I take a side trip to Cover Letters From Hell and I get to feeling so much better. Likewise, whenever I start to thinking I shall never find True Love again, it's heartening stories like this that remind me that I am not at the absolute bottom of the barrel.
In fact, it would seem that I am capable of achieving almost Rickjamesian levels of superfreakery compared to someone who apparently opens his conversations with quotes from the Monster Manual.
Though I bade a hearty farewell to my little velvet sack of dice at age, err, 11 or 12, I know several reasonably well-adjusted adults who are into role-playing games, so it's foolish to regard that as an automatic deal-breaker. But day-umn. Thirty seconds into the conversation with a unknown human female is not the time to breach the subject. It's early in the hand--lead a good card, dude.
But that's small beer compared to the next complaint on the list:
3) He proceeded to complain about getting kicked off his gaming internet site for the next 20 minutes.
Jeebus. I'm doing a little creative visualization work trying to imagine myself on a date with someone who is discoursing on a topic of an analagous level of dullness to "disputes with internet website moderators." Assuming the 20 min. figure is not merely comic exaggeration, I can easily see myself scanning the restaurant walls for fire boxes I could surreptitously pull to end that topic of conversation after...mmmm...five or ten minutes, tops.|W|P|108971641637892529|W|P|wookin pa nub|W|P|7/08/2004 10:20:00 AM|W|P|PJ|W|P|Lighter than usual blogging for the next few days because of vacation to sunny southern Cali. Blogging density will be dependent on availability of spare time. Spare time will be dependent on how much my charming host chooses to be a slug-a-bed. It's all, like, interconnected, maaan.|W|P|108930001268938999|W|P|liteblogging|W|P|7/10/2004 12:25:00 PM|W|P|7/13/2004 04:55:00 AM|W|P|PJ|W|P|silence, woman.7/06/2004 09:23:00 PM|W|P|PJ|W|P|Here's the test. Below are my answers. My convergence score is a respectable 54%.
1. Fred Astaire or Gene Kelly? Astaire.
2. The Great Gatsby or The Sun Also Rises? Tragically, I have not read TSAR.
3. Count Basie or Duke Ellington? Ellington.
4. Cats or dogs? Dogs, though I'm not overfond of either.
5. Matisse or Picasso? Picasso.
6. Yeats or Eliot? Yeats.
7. Buster Keaton or Charlie Chaplin? Chaplin. Never understood the Keaton hype.
8. Flannery O�Connor or John Updike? Updike.
9. To Have and Have Not or Casablanca? Casablanca.
10. Jackson Pollock or Willem de Kooning? de Kooning.
11. The Who or the Stones? Tricky. Give it to the Who by an eyelash. The Stones have the better body of work, but the Who's highlights are more trancendently wonderful.
12. Philip Larkin or Sylvia Plath? Larkin, bitches!
13. Trollope or Dickens? Haven't read enough Trollope to make a call.
14. Billie Holiday or Ella Fitzgerald? Billie.
15. Dostoyevsky or Tolstoy? Dostoyevsky.
16. The Moviegoer or The End of the Affair? Pass.
17. George Balanchine or Martha Graham? Pass.
18. Hot dogs or hamburgers? Hamburgers.
19. Letterman or Leno? Letterman, mostly because I merely dislike him as opposed to hating Leno.
20. Wilco or Cat Power? Wilco.
21. Verdi or Wagner? Verdi.
22. Grace Kelly or Marilyn Monroe? Kelly.
23. Bill Monroe or Johnny Cash? Cash.
24. Kingsley or Martin Amis? Pass.
25. Robert Mitchum or Marlon Brando? Brando.
26. Mark Morris or Twyla Tharp? Pass.
27. Vermeer or Rembrandt? Rembrandt.
28. Tchaikovsky or Chopin? Chopin.
29. Red wine or white? I hate wine.
30. No�l Coward or Oscar Wilde? Wilde.
31. Grosse Pointe Blank or High Fidelity? High Fidelity.
32. Shostakovich or Prokofiev? Pass.
33. Mikhail Baryshnikov or Rudolf Nureyev? Pass.
34. Constable or Turner? Turner.
35. The Searchers or Rio Bravo? Pass.
36. Comedy or tragedy? Comedy. Even if you're talking Shakespeare.
37. Fall or spring? Spring.
38. Manet or Monet? Manet.
39. The Sopranos or The Simpsons? The Simpsons.
40. Rodgers and Hart or Gershwin and Gershwin? Pass.
41. Joseph Conrad or Henry James? Conrad.
42. Sunset or sunrise? Sunset.
43. Johnny Mercer or Cole Porter? Pass.
44. Mac or PC? Mac.
45. New York or Los Angeles? Never really visited either, have no desire to live in either place, but my gut tells me that I'd prefer Enwye.
46. Partisan Review or Horizon? Pass.
47. Stax or Motown? Motown. (Stax is the prestige choice but Motown has gotten to the point where it's so overrated it's become underrated, if you follow me.)
48. Van Gogh or Gauguin? Van Gogh.
49. Steely Dan or Elvis Costello? Not even close--Elvis Costello.
50. Reading a blog or reading a magazine? All things being equal, blog.
51. John Gielgud or Laurence Olivier? Pass.
52. Only the Lonely or Songs for Swingin� Lovers? Pass.
53. Chinatown or Bonnie and Clyde? Ernm....Chinatown.
54. Ghost World or Election? Wow. Election, by a nose.
55. Minimalism or conceptual art? Minimalism.
56. Daffy Duck or Bugs Bunny? Bugs.
57. Modernism or postmodernism? Postmodernism.
58. Batman or Spider-Man? Batman.
59. Emmylou Harris or Lucinda Williams? Emmylou.
60. Johnson or Boswell? Pass.
61. Jane Austen or Virginia Woolf? Pass.
62. The Honeymooners or The Dick Van Dyke Show? Pass.
63. An Eames chair or a Noguchi table? Pass.
64. Out of the Past or Double Indemnity? Pass.
65. The Marriage of Figaro or Don Giovanni? Figaro.
66. Blue or green? Blue.
67. A Midsummer Night�s Dream or As You Like It? Midsummer Night's Dream.
68. Ballet or opera? Definitely opera.
69. Film or live theater? Film.
70. Acoustic or electric? Electric.
71. North by Northwest or Vertigo? Pass.
72. Sargent or Whistler? Whistler.
73. V.S. Naipaul or Milan Kundera? Pass.
74. The Music Man or Oklahoma? Pass.
75. Sushi, yes or no? Yes.
76. The New Yorker under Ross or Shawn? Pass.
77. Tennessee Williams or Edward Albee? Albee.
78. The Portrait of a Lady or The Wings of the Dove? Pass.
79. Paul Taylor or Merce Cunningham? Pass.
80. Frank Lloyd Wright or Mies van der Rohe? Wright.
81. Diana Krall or Norah Jones? If death is not an option, then Krall.
82. Watercolor or pastel? Watercolour.
83. Bus or subway? Subway.
84. Stravinsky or Schoenberg? Stravinsky.
85. Crunchy or smooth peanut butter? Smooth.
86. Willa Cather or Theodore Dreiser? Pass.
87. Schubert or Mozart? Mozart.
88. The Fifties or the Twenties? The Fifties.
89. Huckleberry Finn or Moby-Dick? Moby-Dick.
90. Thomas Mann or James Joyce? Pass.
91. Lester Young or Coleman Hawkins? Pass.
92. Emily Dickinson or Walt Whitman? Dickinson.
93. Abraham Lincoln or Winston Churchill? Lincoln.
94. Liz Phair or Aimee Mann? Even given her latest stumbles, Phair.
95. Italian or French cooking? Italian.
96. Bach on piano or harpsichord? Harpsichord.
97. Anchovies, yes or no? No.
98. Short novels or long ones? Short. (Though one of my all-time faves is Infinite Jest--go fig.)
99. Swing or bebop? Bebop.
100. �The Last Judgment� or �The Last Supper�? Pass|W|P|108916872945192310|W|P|death is not an option|W|P|7/06/2004 06:11:00 PM|W|P|PJ|W|P|The hacks on CNN this morning were trying to think back to the last time a Presidential ticket featured someone as inexperienced in government as John Edwards. (They eventually settled on Spiro Agnew.)
I'm going to assume that it's politeness that caused them to forget about how much experience the current President had when he was elected at the head of the ticket.|W|P|108915610669593522|W|P|politeness|W|P|7/06/2004 04:31:00 PM|W|P|PJ|W|P|John Kerry made himself a little announcement today. Thoughts:
1. Me likee. Edwards was my second choice in the Democratic presidential field, after Dean, and he was the one whose rep got the biggest boost in my eyes during the primary campaign--a lot of us libs thought of him as this sort of lightweight centrist prettyboy and then came away impressed by, among other things, his "Two Americas" spiel: in part because it's good political rhetoric and in part because it's a degree of attention to poor people that is unusual for the modern Democratic party.
2. Why that matters: for one thing, getting poor people to vote wouldn't hurt. Second, I suspect this will help solidify some of the more sane Nader 2000 voters. (Part of the appeal of Ralph Nader four years ago, for me anyway, was not so much a belief that he or the Green Party had superior answers to the Democrats but rather a belief that he was asking questions that the major parties weren't interested in--and a lot of the most powerful questions had to do with poor people.) Third, and potentially more importantly, I think that this announcement will help with white evangelical Christians, a group which broke pretty heavily for Bush in the last election. Many of them will not be dissuaded this time around, but there's a significant number of swing voters who, despite their cultural conservatism, also have a sense of the social Gospel. (What's more, many of them are themselves members of the working poor.) A man who can use their language to make a case for the Bush administration's failure to help the people at the bottom of the pyramid has the potential to peel off enough of these evangelical swing voters to win some races.
3. Everyone's looking forward to the vice-presidential debate. I'm not. Everyone already expects Edwards to wipe the floor with Cheaney. By the time the actual debate rolls around, the expectations are going to be so low for him that the VP/Prince of Darkness will "win" if he fails to emit a five-foot-long stream of drool the first time he opens his mouth. Remember, it was similar low expectations (and the pathetic weakness of Joe Lieberman) that gave him the win in the VP debate of 2000.|W|P|108915510951380576|W|P|obligatory john edwards post|W|P|7/06/2004 03:28:00 AM|W|P|PJ|W|P|quoth the man:
I don't want to sell anything, buy anything, or process anything as a career. I don't want to sell anything bought or processed, or buy anything sold or processed, or process anything sold, bought, or processed, or repair anything sold, bought, or processed. You know, as a career, I don't want to do that.|W|P|108910252342882097|W|P|job hunt blues|W|P|7/06/2004 08:58:00 AM|W|P|7/06/2004 09:18:00 AM|W|P|PJ|W|P|I'm going to follow in the footsteps of some of the champions of the sport...Don "The Dragon" Wilson, Benny "The Jet" Arcadia...have you heard of them?
I can see by your face that the answer's no.7/01/2004 04:19:00 AM|W|P|PJ|W|P|I've got a Gmail invite to burn. Send an e-mail or comment on this post if you want it.|W|P|108867356628746105|W|P|are gmail accounts something people still want?|W|P| |W|P|are you going to join the pro-am kick boxing circut? |W|P|more like HIM being a slug-a-bed. don't let him fool you folks, he's one lazy sum'bitch. |W|P|and i just spelled "autumnal" wrong, what a jackass. |W|P|it's no "convivial" or "atumnual", that's for sure!
|W|P|is "nurturance" even a word?