Who should own the definition of personality?

1994 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 149-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Willem K. B. Hofstee
Keyword(s):  
Target Person ◽  
Personality Structure ◽  
Personality Questionnaire ◽  
The Third ◽  
Third Person ◽  
Personality Questionnaires ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Third Person ◽  
Point Of Reference

The averaged judgment of knowledgeable others provides the best available point of reference both for the definition of personality structure in general and for assessing someone's personality in particular. Self‐judgments, as in personality questionnaires, are intrinsically deficient because judgment errors cannot be averaged out. The recommended procedure for assessing someone's personality is to give a personality questionnaire, phrased in the third person singular, to those who know the target best. This set may or may not include the target person as a judge.

scholarly journals Evangeliefortællingens udsigelse

1990 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ole Davidsen
Keyword(s):  
Kingdom Of God ◽  
Good News ◽  
Main Theme ◽  
Strict Sense ◽  
State Action ◽  
The Third ◽  
Third Person ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Third Person

Inspired by the work of A. J. Greimas and Claude Bremond the article presents an elementary definition of the enunciation of the narrative, its narration:1)      The narrator (enunciator) seeks to give the narratee (enunciate) an idea of a state of being and/or of an action.2)      The subject of being for this state/action is the narrator, the narratee or a third person3)      The responsible subject of doing for this state/action is the narrator, the narratee, the third person A or a fourth person B.A narrative, in the strict sense of this word, is a storytelling discourse, where neither the narrator nor the narratee is performing as subject of being and/or as subject of doing. Furthermore is the action closed, the narrator informs about events, which have taken place. The gospel of Mark can be viewed as a narrative in this sense, since neither the narrator Mark, nor his implied reader, is performing at the stage of its enunciate. The gospel narrative informs about many states and Actions, but the main theme is the realization of the kingdom of God, an action for which God ultimately is the responsible subject of doing (the fourth person B). Now the question is: “Whom is the subject of being favoured by this action?” In the first place the answer must be the third person A, the baptized or the chosen, i.e. persons performing in the enunciate of the narrative. But if the gospel is good news, then the narratee must see himself designated as a favoured subject of being, and another question arises: “How does the narration connect the narrative world with the reality of the reader?! It seems that such a connection can have a bearing upon time, place and/or person, and in the case of the gospel narrative it is upon time. The main action, the realization of the kingdom of God, is not finished in the story world, but will reach its end in the world of the reader (cf. the parable of the wicked husbandmen). By the establishment of this metonymical intercourse, the narration is symbolizing or semiotizing the reader, who receives his Christian identity and being from the narrative.

Effects of Light-Hearted and Serious Entertainment on Enjoyment of the First and Third Person

2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Hofer
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
Media Consumption ◽  
First Person ◽  
Online Experiment ◽  
Entertainment Media ◽  
Third Person Effect ◽  
The Third ◽  
Third Person ◽  
Perceived Enjoyment ◽  
The Third Person

Abstract. This was a study on the perceived enjoyment of different movie genres. In an online experiment, 176 students were randomly divided into two groups (n = 88) and asked to estimate how much they, their closest friends, and young people in general enjoyed either serious or light-hearted movies. These self–other differences in perceived enjoyment of serious or light-hearted movies were also assessed as a function of differing individual motivations underlying entertainment media consumption. The results showed a clear third-person effect for light-hearted movies and a first-person effect for serious movies. The third-person effect for light-hearted movies was moderated by level of hedonic motivation, as participants with high hedonic motivations did not perceive their own and others’ enjoyment of light-hearted films differently. However, eudaimonic motivations did not moderate first-person perceptions in the case of serious films.

Causal determinism and a totally global fatalism from the third-person perspective

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyang Yu
Keyword(s):  
Human Brain ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Causal Determinism ◽  
The Third ◽  
Person Perspective ◽  
Neural Substrate ◽  
Third Person ◽  
Third Person Perspective ◽  
Physical Laws ◽  
The Third Person

The human brain and the human language are precisely constructed together by evolution/genes, so that in the objective world, a human brain can tell a story to another brain in human language which describes an imagined multiplayer game; in this story, one player of the game represents the human brain itself. It’s possible that the human kind doesn’t really have a subjective world (doesn’t really have conscious experience). An individual has no control even over her choices. Her choices are controlled by the neural substrate. The neural substrate is controlled by the physical laws. So, her choices are controlled by the physical laws. So, she is powerless to do anything other than what she actually does. This is the view of fatalism. Specifically, this is the view of a totally global fatalism, where people have no control even over their choices, from the third-person perspective. And I just argued for fatalism by appeal to causal determinism. Psychologically, a third-person perspective and a new, dedicated personality state are required to bear the totally global fatalism, to avoid severe cognitive dissonance with our default first-person perspective and our original personality state.

scholarly journals Deictic Shifting in Greek Contractual Writing (I–IV AD)

Philologus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 164 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-106
Author(s):  
Klaas Bentein
Keyword(s):  
Literary Texts ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
Narrative Technique ◽  
The Third ◽  
Third Person ◽  
The Third Person

AbstractMuch attention has been paid to ‘deictic shifts’ in Ancient Greek literary texts. In this article I show that similar phenomena can be found in documentary texts. Contracts in particular display unexpected shifts from the first to the third person or vice versa. Rather than constituting a narrative technique, I argue that such shifts should be related to the existence of two major types of stylization, called the ‘objective’ and the ‘subjective’ style. In objectively styled contracts, subjective intrusions may occur as a result of the scribe temporarily assuming himself to be the deictic center, whereas in subjectively styled contracts objective intrusions may occur as a result of the contracting parties dictating to the scribe, and the scribe not modifying the personal references. There are also a couple of texts which display more extensive deictic alter­nations, which suggests that generic confusion between the two major types of stylization may have played a role.

Yahweh, Women, and the Trinity

1975 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 234-242
Author(s):  
Jay G. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Holy Spirit ◽  
New Age ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Holy Spirit ◽  
Third Person ◽  
The Third Person ◽  
The Church ◽  
The Trinity

“Might it not be possible, just at this moment when the fortunes of the church seem to be at low ebb, that we may be entering a new age, an age in which the Holy Spirit will become far more central to the faith, an age when the third person of the Trinity will reveal to us more fully who she is?”

The Mystery of Jesus' Teaching about “The Son of Man”

2012 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 70-80
Author(s):  
Edward A. Beckstrom
Keyword(s):  
Dead Sea Scrolls ◽  
Dead Sea ◽  
High Priest ◽  
The Third ◽  
Son Of Man ◽  
Third Person ◽  
The Will ◽  
The Dead ◽  
The Third Person ◽  
Will Of God

For centuries a mystery has surrounded the meaning of Jesus' term “The Son of Man” in his ministry, and today it is often called “The Son of Man Problem.” Studying “Son of Man” in all of its biblical references, and apocryphal usages, together with insights from the Dead Sea Scrolls, I propose a solution that the idiom means “Priest” or “High Priest,” but most especially “Heavenly High Priest” and is framed in the third person by Jesus because it is expressed as his destiny given by God—it is the Will of God. “The Son of Man” is distinct from Jesus own will, but is the destiny he follows. It is also the use of this term that caused Caiaphas to cry “blasphemy” at Jesus' Sanhedrin trial, who then sent him to Pilate for crucifixion, yet asserting that Jesus proclaimed himself “King of the Jews.” Caiaphas, knew, I believe, that “Son of Man” was synonymous with “High Priest.”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document