Is There a Longevity Personality?
By JOHN CLOUD John Cloud – Tue Apr 21, 4:20 pm ET
Why do some people live to be older than others? . . . [W]hat effect does your personality have on your longevity? . . . A new study . . . looked at this question by examining the personality traits of 246 children of people who had lived to be at least 100. . . .
The study shows that those who live the longest are more outgoing, more active and less neurotic than other people. Long-living women are also more likely to be empathetic and cooperative than women with a normal life span.
These findings comport with what you would expect from evolutionary theory: those who are extroverted enough to make friends and help others are those who are going to be able to gather enough resources to make it through tough times.
[O]ther traits that you might consider advantageous had no impact. . . . Those who were more self-disciplined, for instance, were no more likely to live to be very old (which might explain the long life of the smoking French lady). Also, being open to new ideas had no relationship to long life, which might explain all those cantankerous old people who are fixed in their ways.
The problem with all statistical studies is that they tell us more about statistical methods than about life. Consider the problems: Who defines words like "outgoing," "active," and "less neurotic"?
And what are their contraries? In other words, what is "ingoing," "inactive," or "normal" (Freud doubted if there were such a thing as normality)?
And what does "empathy" mean? How does one measure it, or "cooperative"? By statistical methods of course (questionaires, databases, "control studies," etc.). But then the confirmation is circular: the statistical paradigm (model) circles around its own methods, not around life.
In point of fact, for example, an "outgoing" person may be easy to manipulate or influence in a bad way, thus shortening their lifespan. Outgoing people want to be liked and may do anything to be liked, such as conspire in a crime, make money their main goal in order to "keep up" with their neighbors, etc.
What about "active"? Active in what? Sports? Education? Prayer?
As for neurosis, Freud taught us that everyone is neurotic to some degree. Freud himself detailed his own mental stresses in his classic, Interpretation of Dreams, where he discussed mainly his own dreams.
Moreover, Freud defined "perversion" as the negative of "neurosis" (the pervert acts out his unconscious impulses instead of repressing them). Thus the pervert is "less neurotic," but that doesn't necessarily mean more "normal" (whatever that means). Even assuming the pervert were normal, perverse acts may involve the perp in legal consequences that could shorten one's life or compromise one's health (casual sex, for example).
What about "cooperative"? Many "cooperative" people could shorten their lives by doing anything the majority or even a few friends ask them to do.
That would depend on context. In a coercive or conformist society, not cooperating could shorten one's life, such as with political or social activism Amnesty International is familiar with. But in another, more free, society, not cooperating could lengthen one's life. For example, not cooperating with racist or criminal groups.
Then there's empathy: how does one measure it? What kind of empathy? Many people cry over others but wouldn't lift a hand to help them. Others seem unstirred by the afflictions of others but promptly write out large checks to assist them. Who has more empathy? How is that measured? By checks, by tears, or by filling out a questionaire?
Besides, there seems to be a contradiction of some terms. If "cantankerous" people live long lives, then does that undermine the belief that "cooperative" or "outgoing" people live long lives? (One assumes a cantankerous person will not be cooperative or outgoing, because others will avoid them.)
Or how are long-lived people who are "fixed in their ideas" different from "cooperative" people? One assumes people fixed in their ideas will not cooperate with others who have different ("new") ideas. Yet both live long lives!
The fact is, statistical studies are finally about statistical methods and controls, not about life. They are "true" until proved false by a subsequent study using different definitions, variables, and controls.
Take a simple word: "religious." That word is simple but complex. Who's religious? People who go to church? People who recite doctrine? People who feel at one with the universe (hence the religious word, "atonement"=at-one with), and thus at peace with themselves and with life?
Thus what holds true in the marketplace holds true for statistics: CAVEAT EMPTOR, which mean (in Latin), "buyer beware."
No comments:
Post a Comment