[HN Gopher] My 8 Best Techniques for Evaluating Character
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       My 8 Best Techniques for Evaluating Character
        
       Author : jger15
       Score  : 86 points
       Date   : 2023-01-18 20:51 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (tedgioia.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (tedgioia.substack.com)
        
       | andrewstuart wrote:
       | If I was a bajillionairre I wouldn't be yelling at service
       | workers, I'd be handing out $100 bills left right and centre,
       | regardless of circumstances.
        
       | euph0ria wrote:
       | Regarding 5: non-lazy people tend to dislike lazy people in the
       | same work group
        
       | purpleblue wrote:
       | I understand the point of this blog post but it's also kind of
       | BS.
       | 
       | For example, the last one about how to handle unexpected
       | situations. Some people have a tendency to panic or have high
       | anxiety over the unknown. That doesn't mean they aren't of high
       | character or you shouldn't do business with them. They could have
       | built their entire lives to anticipate these types of situations
       | and have other coping mechanisms to help deal with it. In a work
       | environment, they could easily have those things in place.
       | 
       | To just spring something on someone without any context or
       | knowing the person feels like a really, really poor "test" of
       | anything.
        
         | Jemaclus wrote:
         | I agree. Context is everything. A "test" in a work environment
         | is one thing, but at a restaurant? My priorities are totally
         | different at a restaurant. I just want to eat and have a good
         | time. I don't need to be in control. That's not why I'm at a
         | restaurant.
         | 
         | At a restaurant, short of something truly egregious like hair
         | in my food or raw meat, I have tremendous patience for wait
         | staff. Mistakes happen. Kitchens can be hectic, orders get mis-
         | entered. Maybe I wasn't clear about what I wanted. But at the
         | end of the day, what I'm eating is far less of a priority than
         | the fact that I'm eating with someone.
         | 
         | But if they bring a dish that wasn't what I ordered, I might
         | just shrug and accept it. Who cares if it's a burger instead
         | salmon and veg? It's not the end of the world for me.
         | 
         | Does that make me a pushover? I don't think so. It just means I
         | don't prioritize restaurant food over other things, like
         | ensuring the table has a good time and is socializing.
         | 
         | Likewise, if someone interrupted us at the table to say hi, I'd
         | generally understand. Maybe it's rude, but we're in public and
         | it's a social situation, and the world doesn't end if someone
         | interrupts to say hi to the person I'm eating with.
         | 
         | But when I'm in the workplace, in context, then I am much
         | firmer. You don't get to interrupt my meetings. You don't get
         | to deliver the wrong project. I don't get to yell at anyone or
         | treat anyone with disrespect, but I also don't need to tolerate
         | disruption and chaos.
        
         | uticus wrote:
         | Hard disagree. Pressure shows us as we _are_ , not as we wish
         | to be.
         | 
         | The fact that it is often more ugly than we wish, does not
         | change it.
         | 
         | Also does not negate the fact that prep work is worthwhile to
         | form habits and counteract the base reactions.
         | 
         | Source: been through the pressure cooker with some things
         | myself & have seen close friends & family go through it.
        
         | Jiro wrote:
         | If some percentage of panicky people have good coping
         | mechanisms, but averaged over all panicky people, having a good
         | coping mechanism is still less likely than for non-panicky
         | people, then it's still efficient to filter out all the panicky
         | people. Probabilities matter and it's better if you pick from a
         | group that is more likely rather than one which is less likely,
         | even if you miss some good people in the less likely group.
        
         | rcarr wrote:
         | Author said the test was for a senior executive who by
         | definition is meant to be a leader. A leader is meant to be
         | someone who can navigate others through the unknown. If you
         | can't navigate the unknown by yourself, then you're a follower
         | and not a leader. The higher up the totem pole you go, the more
         | unknowns you have to be able to deal with as you get further
         | away from being a specialist and more towards a generalist. You
         | literally can't learn everything so you've got to be ok
         | stepping out of your comfort zone and having faith in your
         | abilities and principles to be able to make it through whatever
         | obstacle is in your way.
         | 
         | There is absolutely no judgement in those sentences, as a
         | species we need people with all kinds of different skillsets,
         | and that includes both followers and leaders. And just because
         | someone can't handle the unknown at a certain point in their
         | life doesn't mean they can't evolve to be someone who can. In
         | fact, we all play both roles constantly throughout our entire
         | lives. The CEO is a leader in his company but when he's taking
         | golf lessons he's a follower to the professional golf
         | instructor.
        
         | tbalsam wrote:
         | Yes. I am autistic, for example, and situations that are
         | unpredictable are (guesstimate) about 5-10x more stressful for
         | me than for the average person. Most of my "unavoidable" "weak
         | points" are centered around those things and the extreme stress
         | that can come from them.
         | 
         | It doesn't make me a bad person, just different, and more
         | limited in some ways. My brain may be autistic, but my soul
         | isn't.
        
       | null_shift wrote:
       | Some of the anecdotes seem completely fabricated to provide a
       | convenient example (i.e. the guy's wife was very observantly
       | watching him play a round of golf with a colleague and caught him
       | cheating?)
        
       | hnthrowaway0328 wrote:
       | Tested on myself and all rules are pretty effective. Well not the
       | last one.
        
       | godelmachine wrote:
       | Kinda disagree with point 1.
       | 
       | People marry who they fall in love with and love is purely
       | emotional.
       | 
       | There's no rhyme or reason to it.
        
         | SpeedilyDamage wrote:
         | Totally disagree; falling in love is 100% a choice, and a
         | choice you have to keep making every single day thereafter.
         | 
         | We are not slaves to our emotions; we have reason, we make
         | decisions with our actions, we have free will.
         | 
         | To say otherwise is to literally deny the concept of humanity
         | itself.
        
         | yowzadave wrote:
         | It says something about you that this is your perspective!
         | 
         | > People marry who they fall in love with and love is purely
         | emotional.
         | 
         | These are two different assertions, both of which would require
         | substantiation. I've known many people who married partners who
         | they seemed not particularly to like, either out of habit, a
         | sense of obligation, cultural pressure, poor self-image, etc.
         | Of course, it's always easy to say "I saw the signs long ago"
         | when a marriage goes south--but honestly, haven't you?
         | 
         | "Love" is a vague concept which could mean many things, any
         | number of which could be components of a successful marriage.
         | Discerning which of these attributes were important to the
         | partners in a marriage is one of the things that makes it
         | interesting to get to know other couples...and can certainly
         | tell you something about their values.
        
       | jstarfish wrote:
       | I have to deal with People-as-a-Problem for a living.
       | 
       | On the whole, this isn't a bad litmus test, but it's obvious he
       | associates with an older crowd. In recent years, some of these
       | have started to be subverted.
       | 
       | > 3. Discover what experiences formed their character in early
       | life
       | 
       | Glad his experience went well, but this is fishing for emotional
       | intelligence. No stranger needs to be asking these sorts of
       | questions-- you end up letting slip things like parent issues,
       | lack of friends, low self-esteem, etc. and they end up exploiting
       | that later. It's Grooming, and how you end up working for an
       | abusive boss.
       | 
       | > 5. Identify what irritates people the most in others--because
       | this is probably the trait they dislike most in themselves.
       | 
       | No. This is 1960s psychobabble (projection). You don't have to be
       | a liar to hate liars, nor do you need to be a closet homosexual
       | to be homophobic. Nobody would suggest that a guy who commits
       | hate crimes against Chinese secretly wishes he were Asian.
       | 
       | Some people just have trust issues/take Integrity seriously, and
       | other people just don't have tolerance for anything that
       | challenges their world view. Be careful what you read into.
        
         | JenrHywy wrote:
         | I think 5) has some merit, but wasn't worded as carefully as it
         | could have been. I find many of the things I dislike most in
         | others are the "failings" that I have a natural proclivity for,
         | but have worked hard to overcome. I'm not sure how well it
         | works as a test of character though, because it's hard to tell
         | where the person is on their "overcoming" journey.
         | 
         | Though as you say, there are many exceptions. I have a strong
         | tendency towards honesty and a strong aversion to dishonesty,
         | for example.
         | 
         | Trying to untangle it all very likely too complex a problem for
         | this to be used as a meaningful heuristic, but it probably
         | shouldn't be completely ignored, either.
        
         | dinkleberg wrote:
         | Yeah overall it is a good article, but #5 is nonsense that is
         | spouted too often. It may be true that people often project the
         | things they hate about themselves to others, but you can't know
         | whether or not that is the case when getting to know someone.
         | 
         | If you're their therapist and you know that they are homophobic
         | and also homosexual, you can get to the root of things. But
         | otherwise, if you see that someone is homophobic, they may just
         | be homophobic.
        
         | roughly wrote:
         | Yeah, #3 in particular - man, I wonder how many people the
         | author struck out because they had a rough childhood or grew up
         | in a bad area. People can change, they often do change, and
         | judging them by how they dealt with the part of their life they
         | had no real control over, as opposed to what they've done
         | since, doesn't strike me as any real kind of wisdom.
        
           | JenrHywy wrote:
           | I think the author's point is exactly the opposite - he's
           | _more_ impressed by people who experienced adversity in their
           | early years and (presumably) have overcome it to the point
           | where they 're interviewing with him.
        
         | tbalsam wrote:
         | I would politely disagree, I think there's a fine road between
         | both of what you are saying here. Oftentimes people do project
         | outward their hate because they hate it in themselves -- we are
         | creatures with much logical momentum unfortunately, and many
         | conflicts can arise when people try to paper over their own
         | biases and *isms. It's not psychobabble, it's a phenomenon that
         | has been very well demonstrated and is commonly accepted today
         | as a part of an evidence-based practice for trauma resolution.
         | Some of the examples you brought up were fallacious, though I
         | unfortunately don't have any good resources to point you to.
         | 
         | As far as the first point, I could see it going either way. I
         | know where many people came from in their early years, and it
         | is actually the fuel that helps me give them respect when they
         | act in inappropriate manners considering the situation at hand
         | -- I can recontextualize and see where they are coming from. It
         | gives me empathy, an ability to connect to them, and an ability
         | to fundamentally feel safe enough to better love them.
        
       | skywal_l wrote:
       | > 1. Forget what they say--instead look at who they marry.
       | 
       | Reminds me of Moneyball when they are evaluating potential
       | prospects on how good looking their girlfriends are. [0]
       | 
       | [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6naO8n6HsqE
        
         | skizm wrote:
         | Which turns out to be completely wrong in the end though lol.
        
         | uticus wrote:
         | Seems there is _some_ level of wisdom here. Of course you can
         | 't see inside a man's head by doing this, but some things are
         | gonna be obvious. Besides, when it comes to judging, only God
         | can see the heart - the rest of us mortals have to rely on what
         | is exposed to us.
        
         | roughly wrote:
         | I think "marry" is some old-school shorthand here, but there's
         | merit to paying attention to who someone keeps close.
        
       | GGO wrote:
       | I enjoyed reading this a lot. I think there is a lot of wisdom
       | here. You dont have to follow everything to the letter, but there
       | is something deep to learn in each point.
        
       | uticus wrote:
       | > Even worse, I'm gonna be judgemental.
       | 
       | Apples of gold in settings of silver. Judging has value, but must
       | be balanced - often by a virtue such as love. Source: Book of
       | Proverbs (aka another source of techniques for judging character
       | and other such secrets).
       | 
       | Not sure if this was intentional, but sections about treating
       | people who cannot repay seemed to me to bundle love and judgement
       | together well.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | roughly wrote:
       | I'm a big fan of number 2 - people who think in hierarchies tend
       | to think things are below them - but 7 is extremely
       | underappreciated.
       | 
       | If you haven't seen it, the Al Capone theory of Sexual Harassment
       | (<https://hypatia.ca/2017/07/18/the-al-capone-theory-of-
       | sexual...>) covers this pretty well: Someone who'll do the wrong
       | thing in one circumstance has already displayed the moral
       | flexibility to convince themselves it's OK to do the wrong thing
       | in other circumstances. We're none of us saints, but if you don't
       | have the fortitude to keep to your principles (or the principles
       | to keep to) when the stakes are small, boy, it's a whole lot
       | harder to convince yourself to accept the cost of doing the right
       | thing when the stakes are higher.
        
       | bryceacc wrote:
       | i think the final point about using these techniques on oneself
       | is the most valuable of all. I can see point 5 applying to myself
       | the most. But I am also glad I don't feel the need to "analyze"
       | every person I meet with a rubric, that sounds tiring
        
       | gnfargbl wrote:
       | Test 3 is really unfair. People get very different starts in
       | life, and asking about formative experiences is massively biased
       | towards those people who got off the blocks quickly and easily.
       | The interviewer should be thinking about who you are now, not who
       | you once were: your past shouldn't entirely dictate your future.
        
         | JKCalhoun wrote:
         | I think he is correct in this. I am someone who known one
         | expected to be a high paid engineer at a top computer company,
         | working in California. I did not expect it myself.
         | 
         | But my Kansas roots, single mother, being poorer than all my
         | school peers, working minimum wage jobs to pay rent and put
         | myself through a junior college.... It's _still_ who I am, at
         | the core.
        
         | SpeedilyDamage wrote:
         | You're presupposing a whole lot of stuff here, but most of all
         | the idea that these formative stories have to be good ones to
         | indicate a good character.
         | 
         | Coming from a "slow start" background _does_ inform a person 's
         | character, and it can go either way, but finding out about
         | _how_ it informs their character is what the article is trying
         | to say.
        
       | sharemywin wrote:
       | It's a good read and I could see it being useful.
        
       | mjfl wrote:
       | Protip: If you meet me, do not "size up" my wife.
       | 
       | This is homeless-man tier advice.
        
       | dmitrygr wrote:
       | > 8 Best Techniques for Evaluating Character
       | isalnum()         isalpha()         iscntrl()         isdigit()
       | isgraph()         islower()         isprint()         ispunct()
        
         | sidpatil wrote:
         | To be pedantic, those are methods, not techniques.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-01-18 23:00 UTC)