Seems like causation runs from ideology to beliefs about locus of control at least as much as the other way around. Did they even attempt to disentangle these relations?
You are always free to act within the limitations of your surroundings. The market and economy are external to you. The skills you can learn to participate in that market are internal to you. As an individual you can’t change much of the economy. Working with others allows you to change the terms of the economy to meet your needs. Working on yourself helps you meet your needs within the existing economy. There is no logical contradiction between these premises.
I would just say that it isn't so much that you control your own destiny but its just understanding that you're free. This means you can hack away at problems with more punch. People don't deny destiny it would almost be like denying the rain falls from the sky. Instead the perspective is more about wrestling with yourself and with God to see who and what you really are. To believe you are free and have a place in the infinite is all the encouragement you need. Don't deny the rain. It's more about how you respond.
I only saw a list of ideological beliefs. What study and how did it arrive at this conclusion? It seems...as though you started with a bias and...cited corresponding beliefs as evidence to support that bias. That's not how objective analysis works.
@@spine_skull I almost get the impression you are referring to someone who must use critical thinking to navigate the mistakes that conformists make although the latter doesn't realize it because they haven't been forced off the edge of the cliff by their overly-confident peers yet. It's coming. This video presentation is propaganda. It's bullsh*t.
Your piece has popped up unrequested into my RUclips feed... Here's my feedback if you want it, but only read ahead if you want feedback....your final statement in this video is "okay, that's my review" - but you haven't provided a review... you have provided an entirely uncritical summary of the article with no review as to where it fits into the pre-existing literature on this topic, the pro's and con's of the methodology used, or the potential problems with accepting its "conclusions" at face value. I am neither an economist nor a psychologist but I can see a litany of issues with this dataset that you have presented uncritically,as if we can take meaning from it. From the perspective of a university level "review of a paper" you would not get a passing grade. Please call a summary a summary, not a review.
And while I'm typing, it seems to me utterly ridiculous to suggest that Vladamir Lenin acted like someone with an external locus of control...you don't become a iron-fisted dictator, running a massive nation, its army and directing its entire economic output by sitting at home, waiting for other people to do things for you! he spent decades engaged in political machinations and intrigue to reach the position he did, very much showing he was someone with a very strong internal locus of control, if the control of "internal locus of control" and "external locus of control" has an utility as an idea...
Seems like causation runs from ideology to beliefs about locus of control at least as much as the other way around. Did they even attempt to disentangle these relations?
Will be great if you can discuss latest research papers in the field of economics like this. Very useful for the budding researchers…
You are always free to act within the limitations of your surroundings. The market and economy are external to you. The skills you can learn to participate in that market are internal to you. As an individual you can’t change much of the economy. Working with others allows you to change the terms of the economy to meet your needs. Working on yourself helps you meet your needs within the existing economy. There is no logical contradiction between these premises.
I would just say that it isn't so much that you control your own destiny but its just understanding that you're free. This means you can hack away at problems with more punch. People don't deny destiny it would almost be like denying the rain falls from the sky. Instead the perspective is more about wrestling with yourself and with God to see who and what you really are. To believe you are free and have a place in the infinite is all the encouragement you need. Don't deny the rain. It's more about how you respond.
Everyone has all of these traits to varying degrees - it means nothing in the grand scheme.
That is a very interesting connection.
I only saw a list of ideological beliefs. What study and how did it arrive at this conclusion? It seems...as though you started with a bias and...cited corresponding beliefs as evidence to support that bias. That's not how objective analysis works.
external locus of control person spotted
@@spine_skull I almost get the impression you are referring to someone who must use critical thinking to navigate the mistakes that conformists make although the latter doesn't realize it because they haven't been forced off the edge of the cliff by their overly-confident peers yet. It's coming. This video presentation is propaganda. It's bullsh*t.
Your piece has popped up unrequested into my RUclips feed...
Here's my feedback if you want it, but only read ahead if you want feedback....your final statement in this video is "okay, that's my review" - but you haven't provided a review... you have provided an entirely uncritical summary of the article with no review as to where it fits into the pre-existing literature on this topic, the pro's and con's of the methodology used, or the potential problems with accepting its "conclusions" at face value. I am neither an economist nor a psychologist but I can see a litany of issues with this dataset that you have presented uncritically,as if we can take meaning from it. From the perspective of a university level "review of a paper" you would not get a passing grade. Please call a summary a summary, not a review.
And while I'm typing, it seems to me utterly ridiculous to suggest that Vladamir Lenin acted like someone with an external locus of control...you don't become a iron-fisted dictator, running a massive nation, its army and directing its entire economic output by sitting at home, waiting for other people to do things for you! he spent decades engaged in political machinations and intrigue to reach the position he did, very much showing he was someone with a very strong internal locus of control, if the control of "internal locus of control" and "external locus of control" has an utility as an idea...
It's also incredibly surface level