What is the worst combination of personality traits? IMO, arrogance and laziness, because when combined you get a smug person who's too arrogant to think that anybody can see that he or she is lazy. If this person happens to be in authority, then they walk around with a swagger that says "nobody has a clue," but actually most everyone knows exactly what the score is. Which in turn makes me feel like I have to be embarassed for them, which I hate because I shouldn't have to feel embarassed for lazy arrogant persons.
thats true. and im lazy and arrogant. espescially when im tired. but my vote for the worse goes to liars with a natural tendency for honesty
I think that combination of personal traits arrogance + stupidity is much worse than arrogance + laziness. And under "arrogance" I mean not thinking low of others, but thinking high of oneself (undeservingly, due to the second trait). And your choice, Gaear... Well, I do not think that combination so bad, because 1) I am lazy and arrogant, and 2) laziness (lack of desire for unneeded work) and sufficiently high (and deserved) self-esteem are positive traits.
My vote is for arrogance and ignorance. They think that the entire world is the tiny one that exists in their limited experience. It's limited because they feel put upon when expected to broaden their knowledge. If they don't know it, then it must not be important. Of course, this is probably a reflection of my being a teacher.
I wouldn't define them that way, personally. Lack of desire for unneeded work would be something equivalent to the 'work smart' ethic, whereas self esteem can be had without being arrogant. Arrogance would be an unjustifiably high opinion of yourself and/or an unjustifiably low opinion of others (usually with some malice or contempt thrown in for good measure), while laziness would be a desire to do little or no work regardless of whether or not it was necessary. I doubt that you have either of those traits, Sergio.
That's a tough one. Whining would be high on my list, yet I do more than my share of it. Manipulation would also be high on my list, but that's more or less a form of dishonesty. I detest liars. Righteousness is also high on the list, but that's probably a form of arrogance. Deliberately corrupting others...what is that called? Being self centered to an extent that no one else counts. More arrogance? Maybe whining then is arrogance too. I know despair is. Lacking mercy and/or compassion, guess those are forms of arrogance too. Greed. What is that? It's beginning to look like almost everything I dislike falls under arrogance or dishonesty. Both of which I have a lot of. I suspect greed is one or both of those. Laziness doesn't bother me much. It does when it increases my personal workload, but that's being self-centered, I guess. Arrogant again.
I have to go with ignorance, arrogance, and laziness. Unfortunately, I still possess aspects of all 3, but I do work on it. Proud to say I've come along way, since N and J came into my life. I'm still a rather cold-hearted pragmatist, though. :evilgrin:
Hmm. Maybe decadent or depraved? But I would vote ignorant and arrogant, and in that order. Being lazy is no problem, unless it hinder others.
Yea, you meant "bad" aspects of arrogance and laziness, and I meant "good" aspects of them. Unfortunately, it is unclear where they are divided from each other precisely. Thus many of my "work smart" practices could be (and are) considered "no work at all" by some people.
Not to belabor the point, but technically that's inaccurate. There are no 'good' aspects of either of those traits. According to The Free Online Dictionary: arrogant Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance. Marked by or arising from a feeling or assumption of one's superiority toward others: an arrogant contempt for the weak. lazy Resistant to work or exertion; disposed to idleness. Not wanting to work unnecessarily hard might be considered smart or shrewd*, while having high or at least sufficient self-esteem is healthy and doesn't have to involve feelings of superiority or inferiority. *but at least you are working; letting your disinclination for work lead to avoiding all work would turn to the 'evil' side.
If you mean a 'holier than thou' attitude, I suppose it is, but it does seem distinct in that it doesn't necessarily carry contempt with it. Righteous people might genuinely feel sorrow or worry over those they believe to be unrighteous. Seems distinct again ... maybe moreso just selfishness, as is often a result of immaturity, as opposed to a specific belief in your superiority. How is despair arrogant? (I think you may be confusing having any regard for oneself whatsoever with arrogance ... plus, genuine despair happens to you, you don't choose it. That's self-pity.) Whining sounds like less a trait than a habit, unless it's really genuine and consistent self-pity. Or just inconsideration? You can have an inconsiderate person who doesn't necessarily think he's better than you. Also its own thing? ("All for me!" i.e., 'greed.') Maybe it would have been better to start with a definition of terms and a list of choices for traits, lol.
Self-righteousness is a form of arrogance: you are always right. Righteousness is where you want to do what's right. They are almost opposites.
I read in a novel once that despair is believing your problem is so great that even God cannot help you, which is a form of arrogance. That impressed me. I have noticed that people who 'whine' (that includes me I think) are not willing to listen to solutions to whatever they are whining about. That seems a bit arrogant to me. Because of this aspect, in some counseling 'tracks,' venting is not seen as particularly productive. However from my own experience, I find that venting is often necessary to vocalize the problem, thus taking some of the immediate 'power' out of the thinking associated with the problem, so I don't totally agree with that form of counseling. Also, I've been told that when something about another person's character really bothers you, that means you have the same trait. I think this is true to some extent, but doubt if it is all inclusive. I am not sure that I agree with some of your interpretations, but that's what makes discussion interesting, no? You did say 'combination' though. That puts a different slant on things. I was thinking of individual character traits.