Lord777
Professional
- Messages
- 2,579
- Reaction score
- 1,513
- Points
- 113
1. Experience. To be good at understanding people, maturity is essential. This implies not only reaching a certain age (30 years or so), but also a rich store of experience of interacting with human nature in its most diverse and intricate manifestations. Adolescence sees people in the narrow perspective of their limited experiences, and when forced to judge those whose lives are vastly different from their own, they often turn to immature and incongruous cliches such as "the old man is behind the times", "normal guy" or "Weirdo".
2. Similarity. It is a requirement that a person who tries to judge people should be similar in nature to the person he wants to understand. Experimental studies have shown that those who more accurately assess some trait in another person themselves have this trait to a high degree. But the correlation here is not absolute, and everything is not so simple: the mobility of the imagination of one evaluator may be more valuable than the huge reserves of unused experience of another.
3. Intelligence. Experimental research has repeatedly confirmed the fact that there is some connection between high intelligence and the ability to accurately judge other people. Vernon found that high intelligence is especially characteristic of those who accurately assess themselves and strangers, but if the assessors are familiar with those they are assessing, then experience can to some extent replace exceptional intelligence.
4. Deep understanding of yourself (Insight). A correct understanding of our own antisocial tendencies, our pretense and inconsistency, our own complex motives, usually keeps us from judging people too superficially and simply. Blindness and error in understanding our own nature will automatically be transferred to our judgments about others.
5. Complexity. As a rule, people cannot deeply understand those who are more complex and subtle than themselves. A straightforward mind has no sympathy for the excitement of a cultured and versatile mind ... Two souls dwelt in Faust's chest, and only one in his assistant Vanger; and it was Faust who proved to be able in the end to comprehend the meaning of human life.
6. Detachment. Experiments have shown that those who are well versed in others are less sociable. Introversion is more characteristic of them than extraversion, and the best evaluators are mysterious and difficult to assess by others. On average, they do not value social values very highly.
7. Aesthetic Attitude. Often aesthetic tendencies are associated with less sociability. This quality stands above all others, especially if we take the most gifted connoisseurs of people ... The aesthetic mind always tries to penetrate into the harmony inherent in the object, be it something as trivial as some ornament, or something as significant as a human being.
8. Social intelligence (Social Intelligence). This quality is optional. Novelists or artists often lack it. On the other hand, let's say the interviewer should have such a “solid gift”, since his function is more complex: he should listen calmly and at the same time explore, encourage frankness, but at the same time never seem shocked, be friendly , but restrained. patient and at the same time challenging - and yet never show boredom.
2. Similarity. It is a requirement that a person who tries to judge people should be similar in nature to the person he wants to understand. Experimental studies have shown that those who more accurately assess some trait in another person themselves have this trait to a high degree. But the correlation here is not absolute, and everything is not so simple: the mobility of the imagination of one evaluator may be more valuable than the huge reserves of unused experience of another.
3. Intelligence. Experimental research has repeatedly confirmed the fact that there is some connection between high intelligence and the ability to accurately judge other people. Vernon found that high intelligence is especially characteristic of those who accurately assess themselves and strangers, but if the assessors are familiar with those they are assessing, then experience can to some extent replace exceptional intelligence.
4. Deep understanding of yourself (Insight). A correct understanding of our own antisocial tendencies, our pretense and inconsistency, our own complex motives, usually keeps us from judging people too superficially and simply. Blindness and error in understanding our own nature will automatically be transferred to our judgments about others.
5. Complexity. As a rule, people cannot deeply understand those who are more complex and subtle than themselves. A straightforward mind has no sympathy for the excitement of a cultured and versatile mind ... Two souls dwelt in Faust's chest, and only one in his assistant Vanger; and it was Faust who proved to be able in the end to comprehend the meaning of human life.
6. Detachment. Experiments have shown that those who are well versed in others are less sociable. Introversion is more characteristic of them than extraversion, and the best evaluators are mysterious and difficult to assess by others. On average, they do not value social values very highly.
7. Aesthetic Attitude. Often aesthetic tendencies are associated with less sociability. This quality stands above all others, especially if we take the most gifted connoisseurs of people ... The aesthetic mind always tries to penetrate into the harmony inherent in the object, be it something as trivial as some ornament, or something as significant as a human being.
8. Social intelligence (Social Intelligence). This quality is optional. Novelists or artists often lack it. On the other hand, let's say the interviewer should have such a “solid gift”, since his function is more complex: he should listen calmly and at the same time explore, encourage frankness, but at the same time never seem shocked, be friendly , but restrained. patient and at the same time challenging - and yet never show boredom.
