Energy and Human Ambitions on a Finite Planet, 2021a

18 <strong>Human</strong> Factors 305
or collectively—becomes a central question. Physics <strong>and</strong> nature are
indifferent to the choices we make, <strong>and</strong> whether or not these choices
serve our long-term interests. Success or failure therefore depends more
on our attitudes <strong>and</strong> reactions to physical reality than it does on physics
itself. While this section addresses how personality preferences might
influence human reaction to crisis, it is by no means the only determining
factor. Education, socio-economic status, financial interests, <strong>and</strong> many
other attributes can play a role. Yet underneath it all, we are humans,
<strong>and</strong> possess various traits that influence our reactions.
A common fallacy is that a collection of people, possessing access to
the same set of facts, 2 will respond similarly. Having only occupied
one person’s head, each of us cannot easily comprehend the reactions
another might have to a situation. A variety of metrics have been devised
to characterize different personalities <strong>and</strong> preferences, which play a role
in shaping reactions. The Big–5 <strong>and</strong> Myers–Briggs are among the most
well known. The former provides a scale for each of five traits:
1. Openness: creative <strong>and</strong> curious vs. careful <strong>and</strong> regimented
2. Conscientiousness: degree of organization <strong>and</strong> efficiency
3. Extraversion: socially energetic vs. preference for quiet or alone
4. Agreeableness: engaging <strong>and</strong> sympathetic vs. aloof or cranky
5. Neuroticism: easily rattled vs. confident <strong>and</strong> stable
The Myers–Briggs scheme 3 has four categories that are usually represented
as binary (either/or) labels, but in truth also exist on a continuum
as do the Big–5 traits. Each category in Myers–Briggs acquires a one-letter
label, in the end generating 16 possibilities. 4 The categories are:
2: . . . itself a perplexing challenge in an
ecosystem of polarized information flow
3: Myers–Briggs often triggers a reaction
among knowledgeable individuals that it
is an invalid, or debunked personality measure.
If you are one of those, please reserve
judgment until seeing how it is framed, <strong>and</strong>
accompanying data.
1. I/E: Introvert vs. Extravert: are parties draining or energizing?
2. N/S: iNtuiting vs. Sensing: preference for abstract vs. concrete
direct-sensory information
3. T/F: Thinking vs. Feeling: preference for intellectual/logical or
emotional reasoning
vs. Perceiving: decisiveness vs. keeping options
open
4: . . . ignoring the inconclusive “X” label
that can take the place of any letter when
someone is not strongly to one side or the
other in a category
4. J/P: Judging 5 5: ...notmeaning judgmental
If you have never taken a Myers-Briggs type test, the following three
citations include links to online tests [114–116]. These sites, <strong>and</strong> many
others, offer descriptions of the types. For instance, here is a link 6 to a
description of the INTJ type from [114]. Other types are linked from that
page.
Many scientists find themselves in the INTX camps. 7 Technically speaking,
the last category (J/P) reflects whether a person relies more heavily
on the N/S axis (if P) or the T/F axis (if J). In the case of INTP, abstraction/theory
is valued over logic, <strong>and</strong> the reverse for INTJ. Figure 18.1
provides an indication of the frequency of each type. 8
A survey of visitors to the author’s Do the Math website, which presents
a quantitative look at energy <strong>and</strong> resource use much in the same spirit as
6: . . . can also access from citation link
7: Experimentalists are more likely to be J
<strong>and</strong> theorists are more likely to be P.
8: Keep in mind that real people can blend
attributes <strong>and</strong> do not always fall cleanly
into a given “box,” so the 16 tidy categories
is somewhat artificial.
© 2021 T. W. Murphy, Jr.; Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Lic.;
Freely available at: https://escholarship.org/uc/energy_ambitions.