Over the course of my ‘educational’ life, I’ve met heaps of people. If I could narrow people down into smaller segments, I believe I could bring the categories down to just two, with some possible venn-diagram-esque overlap.
The distinction is found in a very specific personality trait. It is between the extremes of impulsiveness and calculation. I’ve met very few that are fully on the extreme of either, but most seem to fall firmly in one category or another.
The impulsiveness I’m referring to is that of the risk-taker, the care-free or laid back personality. They don’t take life too seriously, and tend to opt for the less stressful option in everything. They don’t calculate such decisions, they just occur naturally to them. It is part of the beauty of the personality. No thought is required, if there is, its minimal, and the correct path seems clear as day. Critical viewpoints of their actions seem near irrelevant, primarily because in their mind it is truth—simple and obvious truth.
The calculating type is, needless to say, the converse of the impulsive. They are the thinkers, the planners, the strategists. They look at all options with equal bias, weighing them all against each other, and reasoning the best outcome. The decisions they come to, as well as they things they like are analyzed for their truth—broken down until they make sense and can be explained. Emotions and ‘feelings’ need to be understood, and/or processed. Why do we feel this way? Why does this make me happy? They are not satisfied with the simplistic feeling that things like art, taste, etc give them. They get just as much, if not more, fulfillment from understanding as they do from the actual feeling. Sometimes, they don’t feel satisfied unless they at least somewhat understand a feeling.
I would be willing to cede that most people are a fair mix of the two personalities, yet one always wins out over the other. When a real situation faces them down, they will resort utterly to the dominant personality. Not out of choice or practice, but because its what they’re naturally inclined to do. It is ‘in their blood,’ so to say.
Where things get interesting is when a person from one side meets one from the other. ‘opposites attract,’ is a half-assed cliché that’s false a lot more than its true, and that’s primarily because the calculating personality types are the ones that really observed the truth of the matter, and decided to explicate the results. But there is a mild truth to it, and unfortunately it’s a sad truth. These two seemingly-clashing personality types lead to a Shakespearean drama that seems to unfold the same way every time. Just looking at the two personalities and how they operate, its inevitable that the result should end in the same place every time the two opposites meet.
The initial meeting is a work of art. The impulsive one does just that—acts on feelings. They find the other person attractive, seems fun based on what they can pick up from short conversation, and so they are open to some progression. The calculating one—reactions always dependant on current situation—see the actions/personality of the impulsive one. The impulsivness gives off a sort of air of confidence, which is attractive to a point in any situation. That confidence, combined with any remote successful conversation will boost the belief in the calculating that there could be something to this impulsive person. To the calculating, it’s all about what can have the best chances. The person seems fun, interesting, attractive, and they’re friendly. All signs point to moving forward.
The next part is when they engage each other with more depth. Slowly their personalities begin to reveal themselves, but not fully. The impulsive personality can usually find something alluring in the ‘efficiency’ of the calculating. They have a plan, they pursue it, they succeed. They seem fulfilled, they seem as though when they put their mind to something they really do accomplish it. Success is attractive.
The calculating personality, however, never feels fully successful or accomplished with what they’ve done. They’re big picture thinkers, and are always working for something bigger. This gives off an impression of modesty—another attractive feature.
The calculating person sees the care-free attitude of the impulsive. They live more simply than he does, and yet find a meaning in what they do. They don’t seem to be plagued by the idea of trying to work for some bigger idea. The calculating sees the impulsive as able to live in the moment, in the day, and able to just enjoy a simple aspect of life. They see this as something very wonderful to see, and it makes them hopeful. Is it happiness they other person has attained? Some constant state of joy? Consistent content is an attractive feature.
The calculating enjoy being around that person more because they experience that in the moment-ness whenever they are around the impulsive. They’re happy, because the other person is happy, and usually tells/shows them why. Not in the reasoned/deductive manner that the calculating is used to, but in the impulsive way of, ‘feeling is enough.’ The calculating is made happy by being around the impulsive. The calculating becomes more attracted to the impulsive due to this.
As things progress, they begin to see the faults, and the contradictions each personality has toward their own. The tragic part in the story, being that the impulsive sees the faults far before the calculating. The impulsive begins to see the state that the calculating finds himself in. He is plagued by structure—the wear and tear of the personality begins to show in conversation and habit of schedule. Soon, the impulsive can see it in the planning of future events. The calculating needs schedule, order. The impulsive would rather it be a spur of the moment event. The impulsive begins to fear that the calculating will pull them into their ‘cage.’
The impulsive begins to worry, and so retreats more into their impulsiveness. They begin to inject their interactions with the calculating personality with impulsiveness. Communication becomes relaxed, plans are made closer and closer to the date/time of execution, etc. This in turn clashes severely with the calculating personality. They prefer full and transparent communication—fast responses, clear language. They get uncomfortable not being able to pencil in an event a day or more in advance. The entire situation of being in contact/relations with the impulsive becomes stressful. The calculating begins to weight he options.
But its too late. The impulsive is detached. The calculating, in an attempt to more fully understand/remedy the situation smothered the impulsive in their further retreat into their personality. They become fully convinced the calculating is going to trap them in his own structure of things, and so they flee. They want to remain impulsive, and not be under the strong influence of the calculating.
If it weren’t for the impulsive leaving first in virtually every scenario, the calculating would do the exact same. The impulsive seems to be trying to passively force their lifestyle upon the calculating. They want him to let go of his projects, take big risks and hope for the best. He sees it as a violation of reason, essentially, the calculating sees the impulsive as being irrational, and concludes that nothing good or lasting can come of this.
But again, its too late. Before those thoughts can be formed the impulsive is gone. Each side is convinced that the other was trying to reel them in and change their lifestyle to suit their comfort zone. In truth, however, they should have remained with the ideas and feelings of that earlier encounter.
What made the opposite attractive to them was that they saw in the other something that they themselves lacked. They saw something they wanted to be, but could not. Somewhere within they wanted that quality, even if within a minute amount. Beyond that, they wanted the other person to influence their life, and not vice-versa.
The tragedy occurs when each doesn’t take into account the idea that this is how the person lives. Theyre within their own area of the venn-diagram. Its how they live, how they operate. The structure for the calculating isn’t an attempt to reel in the impulsive, but just how he is used to things. The lax communication of the impulsive isn’t a withdrawal, its just a status quo habit of their personality.
The reason ‘opposites don’t attract’ is because they misunderstand their desire. Their personalities ‘clash,’ but in a very false sense. It is indeed a clash, but solely because—just like in a collision—each party remains at the same velocity/dedication their lifestyle entails. If it was understood that the opposite side had some desire to attain some level of balance, the clash would instead be an embrace.
I believe that ‘embrace’ is where the original idea behind the cliché is rooted. It is within this misunderstanding and assumption that these opposite personalities fail to succeed.
The irony behind this piece is that I was led to write it due to such an encounter as I just described. I felt like I failed, and things were going badly, but, In fact, after writing this my feelings have changed.
I am hands-down a calculating type. I reason and think way too often. Recently I began to make it a point to start adding more ‘crazy’ in my life. Essentially, adding more risk, taking more chances, and giving more voice to a blind confidence. Meeting the person that I did really helped that idea a long, and gave me more hope for a transition. A dry ending left me dejected, and led me to lose a bit of confidence in the situation.
Now however, I believe I just re-reasoned myself back into confidence. I have to allow it, not let time influence me too much, nor let my default personality take over my decisions. This doesn’t mean I’m not still shifting uncomfortably in my seat when there are no solid plans, but it means im givng it more of a chance to develop. I’m taking a risk, and adapting to a much more impulsive personality in hopes that the slack I give will be given to me in return at some future point.
I said I was going to put more crazy in my life, and if I have to start here so be it.
