Tony is clearly the Spatial kind.
He even works with 3D models.
Me, I'm all of them.
That sounds terrible.
Tony is clearly the Spatial kind.
He even works with 3D models.
Me, I'm all of them.
That sounds terrible.
How is being multi intelligent terrible?
Tony is clearly the Spatial kind.
He even works with 3D models.
Me, I'm all of them.
That sounds terrible.
How is being multi intelligent terrible?
Having no weaknesses means your strengths will be less vibrant.
Tony is clearly the Spatial kind.
He even works with 3D models.
Me, I'm all of them.
That sounds terrible.
How is being multi intelligent terrible?
Having no weaknesses means your strengths will be less vibrant.
I can't draw that well. Definitely mathematical/logical though. I've discovered a knack for programming I never knew I had recently. I got pretty varied musical tastes. I can read and write pretty well. Not so great with empathy probably but I can convey charisma for at least a little bit.
The problem I see with these self-reports is that people tend to post how they would like to see themselves, as opposed to how they actually are.
Inquirer is a case in point. He would like to view himself as "logical-mathematical", while, at least apparently, he seems to be lacking in this area. The 5'1 guy can view himself as a potentially good candidate for a world-leading basketball team, and even say he was born for basketball, but that likely says little about his true natural aptitude.
So while I find it interesting to read these self-reports, I think they often say more about the person's wishes rather than what is actually the case. But that's kind of what makes it interesting I guess.
The problem I see with these self-reports is that people tend to post how they would like to see themselves, as opposed to how they actually are.
So while I find it interesting to read these self-reports, I think they often say more about the person's wishes rather than what is actually the case. But that's kind of what makes it interesting I guess.
That's always been an issue, but you can still use such a thing as context when put next to their cases, and when enough people pick it it builds a relative spectrum of how people see themselves.
If the test itself isn't the best data, you can at least compare and contrast how people chose to answer it for a rough eyeball of reasons why they might do that, especially when next to someone who'd do otherwise for other reasons.
Inquirer is a case in point. He would like to view himself as "logical-mathematical", while, at least apparently, he seems to be lacking in this area.
Care to elaborate?
Unless you're Legga, of course.
That's always been an issue, but you can still use such a thing as context when put next to their cases, and when enough people pick it it builds a relative spectrum of how people see themselves.
If the test itself isn't the best data, you can at least compare and contrast how people chose to answer it for a rough eyeball of reasons why they might do that, especially when next to someone who'd do otherwise for other reasons.
Oh I agree completely. I made that post to provoke.
Inquirer is a case in point. He would like to view himself as "logical-mathematical", while, at least apparently, he seems to be lacking in this area.
Care to elaborate?
Unless you're Legga, of course.
I would argue that I'm right on the basis that it is true.
Inquirer is a case in point. He would like to view himself as "logical-mathematical", while, at least apparently, he seems to be lacking in this area.
Care to elaborate?
Unless you're Legga, of course.
I would argue that I'm right on the basis that it is true.
Can't argue with that.
The problem I see with these self-reports is that people tend to post how they would like to see themselves, as opposed to how they actually are.
Inquirer is a case in point. He would like to view himself as "logical-mathematical", while, at least apparently, he seems to be lacking in this area. The 5'1 guy can view himself as a potentially good candidate for a world-leading basketball team, and even say he was born for basketball, but that likely says little about his true natural aptitude.
So while I find it interesting to read these self-reports, I think they often say more about the person's wishes rather than what is actually the case. But that's kind of what makes it interesting I guess.
Both self reports and analysis of another person is subject to biases. Go along this line of thinking and at the end of it, every thought that could be valid and is subject to variety among people would not be worth anything because at that point due to our inherent biases you could only say something absolutely objective is a legitimate thought, and therefore only mathematical/logical intelligence would be valued so we'd end up like a society of Vulcans. Do we really want this? If not, then sometimes biased thoughts should be given some value be it regarding yourself or others.
