Personality test.

This moderated forum is for discussion of Alexander the Great. Inappropriate posts will be deleted without warning. Examples of inappropriate posts are:
* The Greek/Macedonian debate
* Blatant requests for pre-written assignments by lazy students - we don't mind the subtle ones ;-)
* Foul or inappropriate language

Moderator: pothos moderators

User avatar
dean
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 735
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 3:31 pm
Location: Las Palmas, Spain

Personality test.

Post by dean »

Hi everybody, I am curious about most aspects of Alexander's life- but most especially his personality. I have got up to the battle of Guagmela in "The Nature Of Alexandr+¬" by Renault and still haven't been enlightened as to the real mechanisms at work. I do agree though with her idea that Alex acted on the implicit belief that neither defeat nor fear existed. Recently I have read on the web several hypothesis written by doctors about his death and I would love to read some similar mature texts regarding his "persona" to understand a little bit better what made him tick. A man capable of great acts of compassion and cruelty- he seems to be a paradox. I'd love to know why he seems to arouse such fascination that people would spend a good part of their lives studying what he did. So, are there any psychologists out there who can adequately explain "how he did it"? Regards Dean.
carpe diem
yiannis
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2002 3:22 am

Re: Personality test.

Post by yiannis »

Well, you see a psychologist could probably reach to a conclusion only after actually seeing and interviewing Alexander!
When it comes to the rest of us we can only, judging by his actions, hypothesize. Naturally each one of us reaches different conclusions and interpret thing in different ways:)
regards,
Yiannis
User avatar
marcus
Somatophylax
Posts: 4785
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 7:27 am
Location: Nottingham, England

Re: Personality test.

Post by marcus »

Hi Yiannis,Yes, I agree that a psychologist would probably be extremely wary about making a pronouncement without spending time with Alexander. Maybe one of the FBI's criminal profilers would do a better job!However, from the source material that is available to us, I think a number of people have made some good attempts to get 'beneath the skin', so to speak. I don't know whether any Freud-type analysts have done it but reading the analyses of the various Alexander writers will give some fairly full pictures.Wouldn't it be great to put Alexander through some of the personality tests that businesses use to weed out candidates? I wonder whether Alexander would be considered board-room material, or unemployable (which are sometimes one and the same thing ).All the bestMarcus
Marcus
Sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis imago
At Amazon US
At Amazon UK
Linda
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 3:57 pm

Re: Personality test.

Post by Linda »

There was a psychoanalytical survey done of A :Thomas, K RA psychoanalytic study of Alexander the Great
Psychoanalytic ReviewVolume 82, Issue 6, December 1995, Pages 859-901
ISSN: 0033-2836which attempts to support a Freudian analysis of his personality, which I think is a load of old bollocks, frankly, but here is the abstract:The purpose of this paper was to demonstrate how Freudian concepts such as the Oedipus complex, castration anxiety, fear of loss of love, the psychosexual stages of development, and the tripartite structure of personality can be used to understand the life and achievements of previous termAlexander the Great.next term To accomplish this purpose, specific incidents, myths, and relationships in Alexander's life were analyzed from a Freudian psychoanalytic perspective. Green (1991), in his recent biography of Alexander, has questioned the merit of using Freudian concepts to understand Alexander's character. In fact, he stated specifically: If he (Alexander) had any kind of Oedipus complex it came in a poor second to the burning dynastic ambition which Olympias so sedulously fostered in him; those who insist on his psychological motivation would do better to take Adler as their mentor than Freud (p.56). Later, in the concluding section of his book, Green (1991, pp. 486-487) discounted Freudian interpretations of Alexander's distaste for sex, the rumors of his homosexual liaisons, his partiality for middle-aged or elderly ladies, and the systematic domination of his early years by Olympias as little more than the projected fears and desires of the interpreters. And again, an Adlerian power-complex paradigm was suggested as the preferable theoretical framework to use. Green's argument was based primarily on an exchange, reported originally by Plutarch, which took place between Alexander and Philip prior to Alexander's tutorship with Aristotle. Purportedly, Philip enjoined his son to study hard and pay close attention to all Aristotle said "so that you may not do a great many things of the sort that I am sorry I have done." At this point, Alexander "somewhat pertly" took Philip to task "because he was having children by other women besides his wife." Philip's reply was: "Well then, if you have many competitors for the kingdom, prove yourself honorable and good, so that you may obtain the kingdom not because of me, but because of yourself." Green interpreted this exchange as confirming that Alexander was more intereste
Linda
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 3:57 pm

Re: Personality test. (whole thing)

Post by Linda »

The purpose of this paper was to demonstrate how Freudian concepts such as the Oedipus complex, castration anxiety, fear of loss of love, the psychosexual stages of development, and the tripartite structure of personality can be used to understand the life and achievements of previous termAlexander the Great.next term To accomplish this purpose, specific incidents, myths, and relationships in Alexander's life were analyzed from a Freudian psychoanalytic perspective. Green (1991), in his recent biography of Alexander, has questioned the merit of using Freudian concepts to understand Alexander's character. In fact, he stated specifically: If he (Alexander) had any kind of Oedipus complex it came in a poor second to the burning dynastic ambition which Olympias so sedulously fostered in him; those who insist on his psychological motivation would do better to take Adler as their mentor than Freud (p.56). Later, in the concluding section of his book, Green (1991, pp. 486-487) discounted Freudian interpretations of Alexander's distaste for sex, the rumors of his homosexual liaisons, his partiality for middle-aged or elderly ladies, and the systematic domination of his early years by Olympias as little more than the projected fears and desires of the interpreters. And again, an Adlerian power-complex paradigm was suggested as the preferable theoretical framework to use. Green's argument was based primarily on an exchange, reported originally by Plutarch, which took place between Alexander and Philip prior to Alexander's tutorship with Aristotle. Purportedly, Philip enjoined his son to study hard and pay close attention to all Aristotle said "so that you may not do a great many things of the sort that I am sorry I have done." At this point, Alexander "somewhat pertly" took Philip to task "because he was having children by other women besides his wife." Philip's reply was: "Well then, if you have many competitors for the kingdom, prove yourself honorable and good, so that you may obtain the kingdom not because of me, but because of yourself." Green interpreted this exchange as confirming that Alexander was more interested in his succession to the throne (power) than in any sexual relationships Philip might be having with any women other than Olympias. That is, Alexander's concern in this exchange was not about Philip's marital infidelity per se, but rather about the prospect of potential competitors (other children) for the throne. Significantly, by emphasizing the
User avatar
nick
Somatophylax
Posts: 442
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 5:32 am

Re: whole thing?

Post by nick »

Dear Linda -
Obviously our Forum does not allow longer replies... But as this is such an interesting topic, why don't we add a "Psyco-analysis" article to the regular menu? Then we have plenty of room to include all nuances... Is there anybody who likes to do this?
Regards - Nick
User avatar
marcus
Somatophylax
Posts: 4785
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 7:27 am
Location: Nottingham, England

Re: whole thing?

Post by marcus »

It seems as if Linda already has the necessary information. Sorry to dump this on you, Linda, but it looks as if it's your job :-))All the bestMarcus
Marcus
Sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis imago
At Amazon US
At Amazon UK
karen
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 451
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2002 7:03 am

Spare Alexander from Freud

Post by karen »

Hi all:I think this is an interesting exercise, but please, whoever does it, spare us from Freud, especially the Oedipus complex. I've studied Freud's life and work, and the only reason he came up with the Oedipus complex is that he was going to get drummed out of doctorhood for his original hypothesis: hysteria is caused by childhood sexual abuse. The Oedipus complex was a career-saving move, not a real discovery, and the modern mental health profession has pretty much dismissed it entirely.Love & peace,
Karen
User avatar
dean
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 735
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 3:31 pm
Location: Las Palmas, Spain

Re: Personality test. (whole thing)

Post by dean »

Hello Linda, I have just got back from hols so have been away from the computer for a few days but was intrigued by your message. In the first few lines you say that you think that the whole analysis quoted is a load of bo****** but you don't say why.If you have a mo plse write to explain. I've read the report and felt that the closing bit was especially interesting- the Plutarch quote about Philip's telling Alexander to be king because of his own merits. As far as I can see, Alexander took individualism to a limit that no other human being has ever done and with an energy that is still breathtaking. Napoleon, Caesar, and other "greats" still rest in his shadow. I also understand that anything we can determine about his true motivations would be simply guesswork but so is any other work on his life... Thankyou and best regards.
carpe diem
User avatar
dean
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 735
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 3:31 pm
Location: Las Palmas, Spain

Re: New section?

Post by dean »

Hi Nick,
How are you? I was very pleased to read your suggestion that maybe a part of this site could supply more information. I don't believe that Alexander was simply a product of his fate- his nature was unique because he rose above it at every step of the way and for that reason I think further info would be useful regarding his complex makeup. I am quite impressed with Renault's "Nature.." but am conscious of the overpowering and sometimes blindingly obvious love she has for Alexander- so I can't say I believe everything she writes.
I would love to write something on this, unfortunately I think that it would be best done by an expert and I am but an amateur in this field. Hopefully some volunteer will come forth. Best wishes, Dean.
carpe diem
User avatar
dean
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 735
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 3:31 pm
Location: Las Palmas, Spain

Re: Spare Alexander from Freud

Post by dean »

Hi Karen, I too would not be too delighted to have Freud's breakdown of Alex's psyche (apart from it taking about a hundred years on the couch anyway). Alex's youth, which counts for two thirds of his life are practically unaccounted for in comparison to the last ten years and this is a real shame for it could have given us some real clues. Maybe we could have found out what was really going on in that mind of his to make us be here, two thousand years later, wondering...Best regards, Dean.
carpe diem
Linda
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 3:57 pm

Re: Personality test. (whole thing)

Post by Linda »

Hi DeanNot sure if this will get seen, but in answer to your question, the abstract from the paper suggests that Alexander is worthy of a Freudian analysis, and, like Karen, I think that is a loads of the aforesaid items. I don't like Freud, and in any case don't think that Alexander had an unnatural attachment to his mother, and wanted to sleep with hsi father, or whatever rubbish Freud would say, as suggested by the paper. I am a great believer in genetics over environment. I think Green was nearer the truth, but to say he had a "Adler power complex" is bizarre - I don't believe such things exist. Just words.. Alexander was competitive because he had a competitive mother and comeptitive father.I don't know much about psychoanalysis, but what I do know, I distrust. I think it is compeletely unnecessary. I would not be able to write a bit for a psychoanalysis bit of this site - I just quoted the article because I came across it.
ariadne
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:32 am

Re: Personality test.

Post by ariadne »

Hello !

I don't thing Freud's theory is a good way to understand A' s mind, because true or not, this theory belongs to a civilisation and a century wich are not A' s ones. To analyse A in term of freudism, is like analyse Oedipius complex of these amazonian Indians whose name I don't remember, wich are educated by their maternal oncle and don't know their father ...
I mean A's didn't live in a nuclear family, didn't share our modern values about sexualy, education, etc...

It is only my little opinion...

And for the rest, God knows how I'm fascinated by this character, but I fear in fact there are many others Alexanders, lords of war products of their civilisation, A may just be one the most lucky (may be not the most, Gengis, anyway ? ).
In Alexander's case, we may be victims of an optical illusion due to the facts that :
- he belongs to the roots of our civilisation, not to barbars invasors (Iranians have a totally different view on him, of course)
- so he shared some values gived to our time by greek civilisation, he liked philosophy and poetry, art, and it makes him sympatical
-alone by the greet conquerors, he died young and always succesfull, so he's the perfect figure of the young dead who becomes a her (from Achilleus to JFK ? ).

Just an illusion, so, but i love it !

Regards,

Ariadne.
ariadne
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:32 am

Re: Personality test.

Post by ariadne »

To complete my post, I mean, in fact, there is not so great mystery to resolve in A' s mind.

We just think there is mystery because of the (false) familiarity of classical civilisation, wich had "psychologisants" writers like Plutarchus, etc, wich are interested on A's thoughts and feelings.
We don't wonder the same questions with conquerors of other civilisations, because we not even think they could have had a complicated psychology, feelings, childhood griefs, and all these kind of things.

Optical illusion.
sikander
Somatophylax
Posts: 309
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2002 8:17 pm

Re: Personality test.

Post by sikander »

Greetings,

This has been an interesting thread, but I would suggest Alexander would be no more a puzzle and no less of one than any other man or woman taken in the context of their station in life, environment (both culture and natural), times, opportunities, specific human characteristics or traits, and more. Unique traits are often ascribed to Alexander but in the context of times, positional dynamics, opportunity, etc, he is no more unique than say, a Bill Gates of today. This is not to diminish what he accomplished nor say he was "common place", but it is a recognition that, given ambition, personal drive to excel, intelligence, education, curiousity and opportunity (both by virtue of station of birth, conditions of the particular world at that particular time), his family dynamics (strong parents on both sides, belonging to the "aristocracy" of the times, competition and insecurity of position) along with a personal charisma found in many leaders throughout history, he is understandable in his times. I don't think we need look at limited constructs of personality (as Freud presented)or for anything outside the understandable range of the human norm to "understand" Alexander.
On the other hand, many people find their neighbor hard enough to comprehend, so it is understandable that Alexander may appear to be an enigma <laughing>.
Regards,
Sikander
Post Reply