It's like the powdered alabaster dust fallen onto the prussian blue asphalt...
Being generally dissatisfied with most personality tests/sorters (and being in need of a break at work), I went looking for an entirely different one. I was actually intrigued by these results and the classifications, but that could just very well be the novelty of it all. Also, I'll never be truly sure if I feel that something fits because it's what I am or it's what I would want me to be, though I suppose that's a relatively small distinction if I'm truly trying to be who I want to be. Then again, if indeed the description does fit me, then it might be something that doesn't really work for other people nearly as well.
Well, in case you'd want to take the questionnaire yourself, here is the link:
http://www.psychometricshapes.co.uk/questionnaire.php
And in case you're interested in reading results, here's that link:
http://www.psychometricshapes.co.uk/circle_squig.php
In another corner of my mind, I've been thinking about all of the environmental/green movements that have been half-heartedly going on. It's oddly disconcerting how people will be willing to go out of their way to promote environmental responsibility but then completely ignore a more severe environmental impact. Like printing on both sides of the paper of a two-page print-out but refusing to turn their computers off over the weekend. It's weird how people are concerned, but not really.
It could be the result of a transition from not-caring to caring. But it seems more likely that it's a result of choosing what is easy. If doing the responsible thing is easy, then people will follow up with that.
I also think that having such an emphasis as right/wrong doesn't help things much. I've never liked to be told I "should" do something, being that I have a moral obligation to do something. It seems like the person didn't have enough confidence in my conscience to think that I would be able to make the choice on my own. Now, I do love being told "should" as an invitation to do something or try something new. And I'll admit that I do use "should" a lot when giving advice to friends. (Quite often it's used with 'perhaps' and 'maybe.') But when it carries the weight of Right/Wrong or Good/Bad, well that just ruins the whole purpose of choosing to do something, doesn't it? Taking away my choice by telling me which one is correct.
And who's to say that we really understand such things as right or wrong anyway? Of course there are those times when our intuition is burning for us to do what is true to what we know. But if it doesn't do that, probably the issue is much more clouded than black and white. And it's not just with environmental issues, but with anything in general. Being caught in a two-dimensional world leaves a great deal to be desired. I don't think you could be able to see anything in it, staring at a flat plane that looks to be nothing but a line.
No, I think there is so much more. And concerning ourselves with only two aspects out of countless ones seems to be a waste of time to me. So instead, I'll continue writing my application essay about intercultural communication and the metaphors built in to our language (which is actually coming along fairly well).
Much love and many hugs!
Well, in case you'd want to take the questionnaire yourself, here is the link:
http://www.psychometricshapes.co.uk/questionnaire.php
And in case you're interested in reading results, here's that link:
http://www.psychometricshapes.co.uk/circle_squig.php
In another corner of my mind, I've been thinking about all of the environmental/green movements that have been half-heartedly going on. It's oddly disconcerting how people will be willing to go out of their way to promote environmental responsibility but then completely ignore a more severe environmental impact. Like printing on both sides of the paper of a two-page print-out but refusing to turn their computers off over the weekend. It's weird how people are concerned, but not really.
It could be the result of a transition from not-caring to caring. But it seems more likely that it's a result of choosing what is easy. If doing the responsible thing is easy, then people will follow up with that.
I also think that having such an emphasis as right/wrong doesn't help things much. I've never liked to be told I "should" do something, being that I have a moral obligation to do something. It seems like the person didn't have enough confidence in my conscience to think that I would be able to make the choice on my own. Now, I do love being told "should" as an invitation to do something or try something new. And I'll admit that I do use "should" a lot when giving advice to friends. (Quite often it's used with 'perhaps' and 'maybe.') But when it carries the weight of Right/Wrong or Good/Bad, well that just ruins the whole purpose of choosing to do something, doesn't it? Taking away my choice by telling me which one is correct.
And who's to say that we really understand such things as right or wrong anyway? Of course there are those times when our intuition is burning for us to do what is true to what we know. But if it doesn't do that, probably the issue is much more clouded than black and white. And it's not just with environmental issues, but with anything in general. Being caught in a two-dimensional world leaves a great deal to be desired. I don't think you could be able to see anything in it, staring at a flat plane that looks to be nothing but a line.
No, I think there is so much more. And concerning ourselves with only two aspects out of countless ones seems to be a waste of time to me. So instead, I'll continue writing my application essay about intercultural communication and the metaphors built in to our language (which is actually coming along fairly well).
Much love and many hugs!