# Which Reasoning Style Best Describes The Way You Think?



## mangodelic psycho (Jan 12, 2015)

Which Reasoning Style Best Describes The Way You Think?

_Thanks to @ae1905 for originally posting this on the SP forum.



Along with your main results, please post your strongest reasoning skill as well. Thanks. 


_


Journalist







​_Most Journalists are open to new experiences and enjoy learning about others. They also have a skeptical streak that makes them difficult to trick or manipulate. Their combination of openness and skepticism make them fine judges of character. Approximately 13% of the populace are Journalists._










​You are Intuitive: You tend to trust your intuitions — you size up situations quickly and stick with your judgments once you’ve made them. This tendency can be useful when you need to think on your feet, or when you’re using a skill that you’ve already honed to perfection.
You are Subjective: People and stories interest you more than facts and figures do; you focus on the essence of ideas over the details. Your mind is more qualitative than quantitative. This trait lets you focus on the big picture over the nitty-gritty.
You are Carefree: You tend to live in the moment. You don’t waste a lot of emotional energy fretting about the future. Instead, you focus on getting the most out of life right now.
You are Skeptical: You treat new information and ideas with caution and skepticism. Spurious arguments rarely fool or confuse you, and your beliefs are based on foundations of hard logic. You possess a fine-tuned BS detector.











​You are good at seeing through tricky or deceptive arguments.


----------



## maust (Jul 14, 2014)

Your reasoning style is:


Executive

Executives tend to be people of vision. They consider their own ideas as carefully as they consider ideas that others put before them, and they're adept at organizing both types of thought into clear plans of action for the future. However, they often prefer to leave the nitty-gritty components of these plans to others. Approximately 4% of the populace are Executives.


You are Reflective: You dislike jumping to conclusions quickly. You’re adept at reflecting on your own thoughts. When it looks like your intuitions might be leading you astray, you don’t have a problem overriding them — instead, you take the time to re-evaluate the situation and figure out the wisest course of action.

You are Subjective: People and stories interest you more than facts and figures do; you focus on the essence of ideas over the details. Your mind is more qualitative than quantitative. This trait lets you focus on the big picture over the nitty-gritty.

You are Prepared: You tend to think clearly and comprehensively about the future. This makes you an excellent planner; you’re usually well prepared when you begin a new project, and you’re rarely caught by surprise.

You are Skeptical: You treat new information and ideas with caution and skepticism. Spurious arguments rarely fool or confuse you, and your beliefs are based on foundations of hard logic. You possess a fine-tuned BS detector.


Strongest reasoning skill: future-based reasoning. I think.


----------



## Judgment_Knight (Feb 1, 2015)

Meditator

Meditators often combine two features that are rarely seen together — a relaxed, big-picture worldview and a strong propensity to question their own judgments. This mixture inclines Meditators to ponder life's big questions, which they can consider in great depth if they choose. Approximately 6% of the populace are Meditators.


You are Reflective: You dislike jumping to conclusions quickly. You’re adept at reflecting on your own thoughts. When it looks like your intuitions might be leading you astray, you don’t have a problem overriding them — instead, you take the time to re-evaluate the situation and figure out the wisest course of action.

You are Subjective: People and stories interest you more than facts and figures do; you focus on the essence of ideas over the details. Your mind is more qualitative than quantitative. This trait lets you focus on the big picture over the nitty-gritty.

You are Carefree: You tend to live in the moment. You don’t waste a lot of emotional energy fretting about the future. Instead, you focus on getting the most out of life right now.

You are Open: You're not an aggressive skeptic or naysayer. You tend to consider information without immediately disputing it unless given clear reason to do so. Proving people wrong is not a high priority for you.


----------



## desire machine (Jan 13, 2015)

I got:

Skeptic

Skeptics are just that — skeptical. Not only do they question new information that they receive from others, but they also tend to treat their own thoughts and ideas with some suspicion. They tend to focus this critical perspective on the present, allowing their views to develop as they come across more information. Approximately 5% of the populace are Skeptics.


You are Reflective: You dislike jumping to conclusions quickly. You’re adept at reflecting on your own thoughts. When it looks like your intuitions might be leading you astray, you don’t have a problem overriding them — instead, you take the time to re-evaluate the situation and figure out the wisest course of action.

You are Subjective: People and stories interest you more than facts and figures do; you focus on the essence of ideas over the details. Your mind is more qualitative than quantitative. This trait lets you focus on the big picture over the nitty-gritty.

You are Carefree: You tend to live in the moment. You don’t waste a lot of emotional energy fretting about the future. Instead, you focus on getting the most out of life right now.

You are Skeptical: You treat new information and ideas with caution and skepticism. Spurious arguments rarely fool or confuse you, and your beliefs are based on foundations of hard logic. You possess a fine-tuned BS detector.


...I don't know if I buy that, I think that assessment might be inaccurate


----------



## Dasein (Jun 11, 2015)

I have style.


* *


----------



## Exquisitor (Sep 15, 2015)

_*Detective*

*You are Reflective*: You dislike jumping to conclusions quickly. You’re adept at reflecting on your own thoughts. When it looks like your intuitions might be leading you astray, you don’t have a problem overriding them — instead, you take the time to re-evaluate the situation and figure out the wisest course of action.

*You are Quantitative*: You’re good at working with numbers. Not in a schoolbook way, necessarily — you’re adept at putting this skill to use while solving problems in all manner of real-world situations._*_

*You are Carefree*: You tend to live in the moment. You don’t waste a lot of emotional energy fretting about the future. Instead, you focus on getting the most out of life right now._**_

*You are Skeptical*: You treat new information and ideas with caution and skepticism. Spurious arguments rarely fool or confuse you, and your beliefs are based on foundations of hard logic. You possess a fine-tuned BS detector._


* I suppose they mean that my reasoning tends to be objective and not subjective, which is definitely true, but this makes it sound like I'm naturally good with numbers. I'm actually really slow at arithmetic. What makes the difference, I think, is that I _value_ accuracy. I know to look for the actual numbers and relationships anyway.

** I'd appreciate if they were clearer about how they measured "carefreedom".


Also, I got scored low for not consistently valuing my time in the different questions, and I think this overlooks the nuance of some reasoning. I'm aware of the concept of time valuation, but that doesn't mean the way my time valuation is expressed isn't altered by different contexts.

The questions were "How much extra would you pay to ride an express train and save an hour of travel?" and "How much extra would you pay to be able to complete a task near-instantly and save an hour of work at home?"

In the first case, I considered that when I'm out and about, I'm usually on a schedule (the day ends, after all), and don't want to waste a whole hour doing nothing in transit, so I'd probably be willing to pay something close to the fare of a taxi service or something. At the very most.

In the second case, the task was described as "neutral" and carried out at home. In that situation I'd be more comfortable with where I was and not mind taking an hour to get something done. The most I'd be willing to pay might be buying/downloading some kind of shortcut to a task online, say (trying to make the scenario more concrete, since a hypothesis too divorced from reality doesn't have a "commonsense" answer for me). I wouldn't spend nearly as much to free up that time because there's no compelling reason not to money doing the task myself.

I have a lot more tolerance for working on something in my own time at home than I have for sitting in transit. That's a situation I'd pay more to get out of. Time valuation is complex, and for me, future-oriented, since I prefer engaging in things that develop my mind or get me used to hard work, things that I think will make me a better worker when my studies are over, and therefore things that might increase the money I make.

I also got scored low for the "sunk-cost" fallacy whereby you don't stop doing something that has ceased to serve its original value. This bothered me because the first question asked whether I'd be inclined to finish watching a movie that wasn't any good, or cut my losses and do something else. Generally, if I only realised this most of the way through the movie, I'd stick it out and watch it to the end not because I didn't realise that I could be doing better things with my time, but because I could get more value out of the time I'd already spent by at least having seen the complete film and then being able to develop an informed opinion of it. As you can see, when I don't like something, I enjoy critically analysing it and finding out why, so this would be a good use of my time, with no waste.

So there's not really logical incoherence here, just the problems that arise from using vague real world scenarios as test questions.

And yet if I tried to guess at what the point of each questions was, I'd be doing the test wrong by just answering with my straight self-perception rather than providing evidence which can be analysed.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

Detective

Detectives are tough cookies. They're often caught up entirely in their immediate pursuits, which they attack with vigor and determination. Detectives are highly adept at seeing through nonsense, whether it be verbal, mathematical, or psychological. They are excellent problem-solvers and dogged seekers of the truth. Approximately 5% of the populace are Detectives.


*You are Reflective:* You dislike jumping to conclusions quickly. You’re adept at reflecting on your own thoughts. When it looks like your intuitions might be leading you astray, you don’t have a problem overriding them — instead, you take the time to re-evaluate the situation and figure out the wisest course of action.

*You are Quantitative:* You’re good at working with numbers. Not in a schoolbook way, necessarily — you’re adept at putting this skill to use while solving problems in all manner of real-world situations.

*You are Carefree:* You tend to live in the moment. You don’t waste a lot of emotional energy fretting about the future. Instead, you focus on getting the most out of life right now.

*You are Skeptical:* You treat new information and ideas with caution and skepticism. Spurious arguments rarely fool or confuse you, and your beliefs are based on foundations of hard logic. You possess a fine-tuned BS detector.

Rationality Score: 66.67% (higher than 70% of people who've taken the test)

Quantitative Reasoning: ability to mentally manipulate numbers and other quantitative information.
*My score: 81.25%
Average score: ≈65%* 

Future-Based Reasoning: ability to think clearly and make accurate predictions about the future
*My score: 62.5%
Average score: ≈80%*

Evidence Evaluation: ability to evaluate outside information and theories for accuracy.
*My score: 62.5%
Average score: ≈50%*

Cognitive Awareness: ability to analyze your own intuitions and to override them when they mislead you.
*My score: 68.75%
Average score: ≈50%*​


----------



## SilverFalcon (Dec 18, 2014)

_Rationalists are excellent reasoners in all respects. They can cogently evaluate others' reasoning as well as their own whenever they choose to. They can also think fluidly about facts and figures, and they can evaluate and plan for the future with aplomb. They're rarely susceptible to the cognitive foibles that trip up others. When they apply themselves, Rationalists can master most cognitive tasks. Approximately 9% of the populace are Rationalists_.


*You are Reflective*: _You dislike jumping to conclusions quickly. You’re adept at reflecting on your own thoughts. When it looks like your intuitions might be leading you astray, you don’t have a problem overriding them — instead, you take the time to re-evaluate the situation and figure out the wisest course of action._

*You are Quantitative:* _You’re good at working with numbers. Not in a schoolbook way, necessarily — you’re adept at putting this skill to use while solving problems in all manner of real-world situations._

*You are Prepared:* _You tend to think clearly and comprehensively about the future. This makes you an excellent planner; you’re usually well prepared when you begin a new project, and you’re rarely caught by surprise._

*You are Skeptical:* _You treat new information and ideas with caution and skepticism. Spurious arguments rarely fool or confuse you, and your beliefs are based on foundations of hard logic. You possess a fine-tuned BS detector._

You racked up *80.56%* of the highest possible rationality score!
You scored better than 90% of past users!

Your quantitative reasoning score: 81.25%
Your future-based reasoning score: 81.25%
Your evidence evaluation score: 87.5%
Your cognitive awareness score: 75%

I think I am not as good planner, I do rather analytic plans (to avoid dead-ends, choose effective solutions) than scheduling plans and I am rather tentative and even lazy about those. 
I think I have in higher cognitive awareness score, but when choosing the most probable cause in context I do not waste time with many less plausible scenarios.

To many of the scores might be based on too few questions thus being rather volatile.

I forgot to copy the Strong/Medium/Weak points. All I know I have 3/3/1. Maybe if someone writes them down I would remember.
Surely had:
Strong Reasoning Skill(s):
Not susceptible to the Sunk Cost Fallacy.
You are good at seeing through tricky or deceptive arguments.


----------



## SloppyJoe (Sep 6, 2015)

Inventor

*You are Reflective:* You dislike jumping to conclusions quickly. You’re adept at reflecting on your own thoughts. When it looks like your intuitions might be leading you astray, you don’t have a problem overriding them — instead, you take the time to re-evaluate the situation and figure out the wisest course of action.

*You are Quantitative:* You’re good at working with numbers. Not in a schoolbook way, necessarily — you’re adept at putting this skill to use while solving problems in all manner of real-world situations.

*You are Carefree:* You tend to live in the moment. You don’t waste a lot of emotional energy fretting about the future. Instead, you focus on getting the most out of life right now.

*You are Open:* You're not an aggressive skeptic or naysayer. You tend to consider information without immediately disputing it unless given clear reason to do so. Proving people wrong is not a high priority for you.

You racked up 63.89% of the highest possible rationality score!
You scored better than 60% of past users!

Your quantitative reasoning score: 81.25%
Your future-based reasoning score: 62.5%
Your evidence evaluation score: 43.75%
Your cognitive awareness score: 62.5%

Strong Reasoning Skill(s):
Not susceptible to the Sunk Cost Fallacy.

Weaker Reasoning Skill(s):
Explanation Freeze Tendency
Repeating mistakes.
Planning Fallacy.

Now the question is how sound the test is, and whether comparing me to the rest of the population would result in similar scores. Also, I sometimes love proving people wrong, and I enjoy finding fallacies.


----------



## Tsubaki (Apr 14, 2015)

I just took the test again out of boredom and I have to say, that it fits a lot better ^^"










Most Cardsharps have powerful intuitive decision-making abilities(meh, partially yes, partially no), but their skills don't end there. They're also good with numbers and capable of seeing through deceit, which can give them formidable powers in games of chance(I'm better at deceiving than at noticing deceit but I lve numbers and anything logical). Cardsharps are quick learners and adaptable thinkers(As soon as I understand something, I could write a book about it). Approximately 6% of the populace are Cardsharps.

You are Intuitive: You tend to trust your intuitions — you size up situations quickly and stick with your judgments once you’ve made them(I don't trust my intuitions that much but they are usually better than any other judgement so meh. And I stick with it, yes). This tendency can be useful when you need to think on your feet, or when you’re using a skill that you’ve already honed to perfection.

You are Quantitative: You’re good at working with numbers. Not in a schoolbook way, necessarily — you’re adept at putting this skill to use while solving problems in all manner of real-world situations.(Yessss!)

You are Carefree: You tend to live in the moment. You don’t waste a lot of emotional energy fretting about the future. Instead, you focus on getting the most out of life right now.(Thats more how I try to be and not how I really am. Although I'm worrying a lot less about the future than when I was younger, so maybe it kind of fits...)

You are Skeptical: You treat new information and ideas with caution and skepticism(Although I pretend that I believe everything, I'm actually pretty sceptical). Spurious arguments rarely fool or confuse you, and your beliefs are based on foundations of hard logic. You possess a fine-tuned BS detector(totally).

I also think that this breakdown fits pretty well ^^:

Your quantitative reasoning score: 81.25%
Your future-based reasoning score: 56.25%
Your evidence evaluation score: 50%
Your cognitive awareness score: 37.5%
__________________________________________________

I already posted this in the SJ-Forum once, but it won't hurt to also have it here ^^


----------



## castigat (Aug 26, 2012)

*Free Spirit*









Most Free Spirits like to seek out new experiences; they prefer to enjoy these experience on an emotional level without poring over or analyzing them. They tend to enjoy the more colorful and artistic parts of everyday life. Approximately 21% of the populace are Free Spirits.










You are Intuitive: You tend to trust your intuitions — you size up situations quickly and stick with your judgments once you’ve made them. This tendency can be useful when you need to think on your feet, or when you’re using a skill that you’ve already honed to perfection.
You are Subjective: People and stories interest you more than facts and figures do; you focus on the essence of ideas over the details. Your mind is more qualitative than quantitative. This trait lets you focus on the big picture over the nitty-gritty.
You are Carefree: You tend to live in the moment. You don’t waste a lot of emotional energy fretting about the future. Instead, you focus on getting the most out of life right now.
You are Open: You're not an aggressive skeptic or naysayer. You tend to consider information without immediately disputing it unless given clear reason to do so. Proving people wrong is not a high priority for you.


All but carefree seems to apply.

edit: Second round without wishy-washy/apathetic answers got Skeptic.


----------



## nautilus_5 (Sep 9, 2015)

I got skeptic. A lot of it I agreed with, but some of it I did not. Interesting test.


----------



## Ruane (Jul 9, 2015)

I got skeptic, but how accurate can a test with 21 questions be?


----------



## Clyme (Jul 17, 2014)

_









Executives tend to be people of vision. They consider their own ideas as carefully as they consider ideas that others put before them, and they're adept at organizing both types of thought into clear plans of action for the future. However, they often prefer to leave the nitty-gritty components of these plans to others. Approximately 4% of the populace are Executives._










*You are Reflective*: You dislike jumping to conclusions quickly. You’re adept at reflecting on your own thoughts. When it looks like your intuitions might be leading you astray, you don’t have a problem overriding them — instead, you take the time to re-evaluate the situation and figure out the wisest course of action.
*You are Subjective*: People and stories interest you more than facts and figures do; you focus on the essence of ideas over the details. Your mind is more qualitative than quantitative. This trait lets you focus on the big picture over the nitty-gritty.
*You are Prepared*: You tend to think clearly and comprehensively about the future. This makes you an excellent planner; you’re usually well prepared when you begin a new project, and you’re rarely caught by surprise.
*You are Skeptical*: You treat new information and ideas with caution and skepticism. Spurious arguments rarely fool or confuse you, and your beliefs are based on foundations of hard logic. You possess a fine-tuned BS detector.

*Your quantitative reasoning score:* 75%
*Your future-based reasoning score:* 93.75%
*Your evidence evaluation score:* 81.25%
*Your cognitive awareness score:* 100%

---

I think that the last time I took this, I ended up with "Skeptic." That said, I've changed a bit since then.


----------



## thehalfbloodserb (Sep 23, 2015)

I got skeptic, though I'm not sure if I agree with the carefree aspect of it


----------



## Quift (Apr 15, 2015)

Rationalist.

Of course.


----------



## kimpossible119 (May 15, 2014)

I got the Journalist, but the description is only half true.


----------



## Ne Plus Ultra (May 18, 2015)

I got The Journalist, which is amusingly close to my own line of work. But I found the test to be biased toward a Te-Fi axis thinking style, and I also found the wording suspect. 

For instance, that question about two machines producing two doughnuts in two minutes? I thought it meant that in two minutes, you'll get two doughnuts from these machines, meaning that each machine produces one doughnut a minute, nearly a trick question in its simplicity. Instead, they meant that each machine takes two minutes to produce one doughnut apiece. That wasn't clear, but the whole problem hinges on that understanding.

In other questions, it seemed as though they asked you to make a subjective judgment but then marked you wrong because you didn't make the "right" one. For example, take the question about how much time to budget for a paper when previous papers took four weeks, three weeks, and two weeks. Yeah, I'm aware that the average time to write a paper is three weeks, but the test asks me to factor in that this time I'll be writing on a subject I enjoy and have already put thought into, plus I've learned much about essay writing over the course of the year. The test tells me I've already written an essay in two weeks before without the additional time-saving advantages I have now, and my initial thought is supposedly to give myself one week. So, to me, yes, it's reasonable to be safe and budget _two weeks_. But the test tells me I should have budgeted three because that's the average, and it would be "exceedingly rare that such long-term projects take significantly less time than similar past ventures." Um, I'm sorry, but how is a one out of three track record "exceedingly rare"? Who decided that two weeks as opposed to three is "significantly less time"? I made a subjective decision to factor in variables that might speed up my performance, but now that's wrong by the test maker's subjective definition of "rare" and "significantly less"? Errr...

Yeah. The whole test was that way.


----------



## Urban Erudite (Nov 6, 2012)

I think the moral of the story is people really like taking tests about themselves.


----------



## adultchildofalieninvaders (Aug 29, 2014)

I'm the executive. I seem to be channelling my inner ENTJ.


----------

