DEMOCRATISM - ARISTOCRATISM
DEMOKRATIZM - ARISTOKRATIZM
Democrats (I and III quadra):
Demokraty (I i III kvadry):
1. Democrat perceives and determines himself primarily through individual/personal qualities. In perception of other people personal qualities of people are primary (In terms of personality: are they interesting, pleasant, unpleasant: their wit, ideas, appearance, tastes etc.). because of this individualism is largely a part of, inherent in democrat "I am I".
2. They form their relations/attitude toward a person based on their individual/personal characteristics (Authority, intellect, personal achievement etc.). They recognize advantages/qualities people that are independent of their personal/individual qualities. The relation of the democrat to another person will not be based on their belonging to one group or another, or their relations to the representatives of these groups.
3. They are not inclined to perceive people with which they associate, as representatives of a certain "group of contacts" they have that possess a special quality inherent specifically to people in that group.
4. Democrat is not inclined to use expressions that generalize "group features" of people (For example, "a typical representative") in their speech.
Aristocrats (II and IV kvadry):
Aristokraty (II i IV kvadry):
1. The aristocrat frequently perceives and defines themselves an other people through group belonging (The division into groups can occur based on almost any criteria: professional, the floor they live on, age, nationality, place of residence etc.), for example: "I'm a representative of..." "This ? from such and such". Colectivism is more inherent in the aristocrat.
2. Their attitude toward another person forms under the influence of their attitude/relation with the group to which the person belongs. To the aristocrat is incomprehensible how it is possible to belong to two opposing groups at the same time "You are either with us or them ?against us"
3. Aristocrat separates their "circle of contacts" by a sign, realizes certain "qualities" their friends have.
4. In speech aristocrat frequently use expressions like "group", "typical representative", "ours", "all [insert group] are [insert quality]", etc.
1. Most briefly the essence of each of the attributes can be expressed as: a primary collective "we" (Aristocrats) or an individual "I" (Democrats) and corresponding values.
2. it is possible to notice that the aristocrat is in a larger degree - social, an the democrat ? individualistic. Therefore the dispute of what is more important ? society or the individual, cannot (Shouldn't) be resolved.
3. From the point of view of social psychologists, the perception of the aristocrat more strongly involves mechanisms of social recognition: casual attribution (The degree of the attributes given depends on uniqueness and social conditionality of behaviour) and effect of the "halo/aura" (It is utilize when the individual doesn't have or has barely any information on a person). Both of them ? are a part of stereotypification (Perception/recognition through a stereotype) [1, with. 128].
Ethical intuitive types create new groups ("Inhabitants of sleeping areas", "The typical representative of a new generation of goalkeepers") ? summarizing joint/cumulative features I inherent in their majority.
Logical sensor types use groups which have been created by the ethical intuitivists ? thus being handed over to be processed by their strong logic while already being the basis of a system of personal relations.
In the core of the democrat, the group is created from individuals drawn together by a common interest, business, idea (For the logical intuitive) or on the basis of mutual sympathy (Ethical sensor). Thus the group is not directly in the core of the democrats basis for constructing a hierarchy in society.
Influence of this attribute on determination of the type of personality:
1. Hierarchy and status are frequently described as concepts inherent in structural logic. According to out observations this is entirely false. White logic of the first quadra will adhere to formal requirements, but will not begin to reconstruct all behaviour in accordance to a new order. So will act the aristocrat, as is most obvious in the white logic of the second quadra. The confusion can arise because of this. If we were to observe, we would see that other aristocrats are no less inclined to such "status games", for example "I demand that they relate to me as the director" (EIE), "I cannot associate with those on a higher position then me" (IEE).
2. Division of people on "one's" and "not one's" is frequently attributed to aristocracy. Actually, that division holds true for anyone with white ethics, including democrats (SEE in particular ESI). If we expand the concept, "one's" ? this is that with which close relations are established, there is a mutual connection or sincere attachment. For the IEE an EII sincere attachment and belonging to a group are combined: "one's" and "not one's" for them means whether they "belong" or do "not belong" to a group.
3. Switching from "you" to "you (As in "you" but with respect)" is not always significant from the point of view of manifestation of the attributes. According to the standards of etiquette, rules of behaviour, elders it is accepted to address with "you (as in with respect)", and different informal situations, regardless of the rules, switches to "you (plain)". For instance if a child's mother is the child's teacher then if the child call her "you (plain)" in class it will not be an indicator of aristocracy. It is possible to give more example of this. The important thing is not how they are addressed but the reason for doing so.
"I'm not interested in social belongings of a person or other social hallmarks they may have" "What's in "one's head" does not determine belonging to any group. People are unique." "That? which represents the person/individual is what's important" "When I communicate with somebody it's the same whether they are a man or a woman" "it is difficult to determine in what group somebody belongs, I cannot isolate something that other people do not have" "I am the representative only of ideas" "I can notice groups, but they are not real, the groups are pretend"
"I perceive people based on belonging to a group, I place everyone on a shelf ("A good mother", "лапочка" ...)" "If it is possible to determine to what group the person belongs, then that it is reassuring. It is easier to perceive the information from the person knowing to what group they belong" "I separate people based on professional capabilities. First: to what social and economic group the person belongs to. Second: the way the conduct themselves, their individual qualities" "to you I come as a typical representative of a translator" "Here, in our work place they hired a new secretary recently and she is everything but a secretary. It's because she comes from the "sleeping" regions... oh no, please don't misunderstand me, I'm not an aristocrat! I'm not!" "For me this religion is nothing, but it is necessary for simple people" "You are my friend, but my friends don't steal toilet paper from McDonalds!"