I said:
For example, how on earth does a test includes a number of answers about the workplace that asks about your spiritual feelings of work, whether you wish to be a tribe, supporting traditions, seek to enlighten, etc? Juxtaposed were clear aggressive terms focused on money, power, and conflict.
well, where i work, there are people who are very driven by the vocation to be in the sector they're in, because there is a family heritage, it's something they were interested in when they were small boys, it gives them a very warm feeling. that's a purple vMeme. in the same teams, there are people who are in it for the money, or the intellectual challenge, or for the sheer difficulty of meeting a tough deadline. sometimes, you can be "in it" for many different mixtures of reasons at once, because people are complicated.
When you look at the results, it's clear they want to set up people into 8 very clearly different groups - but the groups themselves seem very forced and almost caricatured.
no, you're missing the point of the theory, it is not that you are a purple or a red or an orange, but that you will have different behaviours depending on the situation or your underlying personality or whatever. the people involved are very clear it's not about putting people in boxes, but about a theory of human development.
In other words, it was not a test of natural responses, but instead, a test that used obvious constructs in order to see how these blazingly obvious derivative constructs could allow a person to be pigeon-holed into a set of narrow constructs.
well, they're obvious because they're real, i think. besides, built into the theory is the idea that people develop from one to the other and back again depending on contingent factors - you can't pigeon-hole someone who doesn't always act in the same way.
It all just felt very artificial, and the use of colour isn't indicative or useful - it's just another label for a very artificial box.
the colour is chosen specifically to be non-indicative, apparently, it's not supposed to give you any clue, although the "cooler" colours are more "we" and the warmer colours are more "me", but that's the extent of it.
A weird thing is that I ended up with Turquoise and orange - and both seem somewhat contradictory (one follows materialism, the other a strange technological philosophy).
then the vMemes associated with those colours haven't been properly explained i don't think - they're certainly not contradictory, though, i can see how they would interrelate. i'd certainly expect you to show both of them, turquoise being very panentheist in spiritual terms, but at the same time you are someone with a particularly strong set of logical capabilities.
However, it is worth pointing out that the questions were focused solely on a work environment, and I'm not sure how you can dissociate many everyday work places from material concerns.
well, that's the point, isn't it - these things are operating on some level, but how strongly and how consciously is the question.
Yet the test wanted to measure materialism without realising the inherent bias this might introduce.
it's not mere materialism, though, the materialism tends to be a symptom, not a cause, so would an overt focus which gave huge importance to rationality and the critical faculties, which you have in spades - that is more likely to be the orange that's showing up than a gold-plated bathtub.
Then again, I'm an arrogant sod as well.
that's a very "orange" way to be! you see?
b'shalom
bananabrain
