Posted by Hal on October 28, 1998 at 17:09:25:
In Reply to: Re: Charisma posted by Derf on October 28, 1998 at 11:23:54:
: I often fail to pick up anything from ONES and FOURS. I guess the facility is missing in me. Also, these types seem, more often than not, to be dry and over-controlled, "clapped into jail by [their] conscience" (Emerson - reputedly an amazingly charismatic individual). These points exist on a line, at opposite ends, so their priorities are practically reverse of each other. But they share a common drive in their conscience (to use the word in Emerson's sense) - their dissatisfaction with themselves.
I've been taking a class on the Transcendentalists of the 1830's to '50's, and from everything presented about Emerson, it sounds to me like he was a 4w5. Strange then that he would be very charismatic.
: People are at their best when they are free of inhibition and worry.
: Yet, since one of my goals is to be a compendium of the human ability to feel, respond, etc., I don't want to concede that anyone "lacks charisma," because then I would only be conceding that I lack the ability to look beyond people's surface inhibitions, or at least to feel beyond them with faith. Wait long enough, and everyone will reveal a charismatic side - a comfortable, confident side, as it were. There are sublime wonders in every person.
I really like this. On the one hand, charisma is very much a "surface" thing, something that is shown to others. But it goes much deeper than that. Nobody likes a phony, and charisma is more than pleasing others. There is an aspect of revealing yourself and being genuine in true charisma.
- Hal -