Choice in wine indicates personality?

B

Brad Kane

Brad Kane
This article suggests that those that prefer sweeter wine tend to have an impulsive personality, while those that prefer drier wines are more open. For those of us that are Geminis, I guess it's par for the course?
 
I don't think we need to worry about establishing that causal link they seem to want to find, but plenty of years of looking at the different wine board communities would seem to show pretty identifiable patterns of personality style and wine preference.

Of course this is not just about wine.
 
originally posted by Sharon Bowman:
"They tested the wine preference of 45 people from Sheffield in South Yorkshire."
Click to expand...

I missed that.

So much for the universality of psychological experiments.

Even wine board folks can figure out that much.
 
So if I like traditional style CdP, barolo, Loire cab francs, chenin blanc, muscadet and gewurztraminer, will this predict that I will be a Victorianist with a pronounced interest in poststructural theory? Or are these accidental coincidences dependent on my genes, which of course cause everything, my impression of awareness to the contrary notwithstanding?
 
originally posted by Rahsaan:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
a Victorianist with a pronounced interest in poststructural theory?
Click to expand...

Technically speaking, I don't think that's a personality type.
Click to expand...

That's just because you don't hang around the right circles. It's well known that choice of literary specialty is a direct manifestation of personality.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
It's well known that choice of literary specialty is a direct manifestation of personality.
Click to expand...

'Direct manifestation of' is not the same thing as being a personality type.

So you would still have to start with the technically-defined personality type (various psychological typologies) and then from there predict what kind of wine/literature/automobiles etc one would like. I imagine one could make some guesses from preference to preference, but then you lose some of the oh-so scientific precision.
 
originally posted by Rahsaan:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
It's well known that choice of literary specialty is a direct manifestation of personality.
Click to expand...

'Direct manifestation of' is not the same thing as being a personality type.

So you would still have to start with the technically-defined personality type (various psychological typologies) and then from there predict what kind of wine/literature/automobiles etc one would like. I imagine one could make some guesses from preference to preference, but then you lose some of the oh-so scientific precision.
Click to expand...

A manifestation isn't an effect. It's the expression of something in visible appearance. Thus it isn't the same thing as a personality type only because that type prior to its manifestation is not perceivable.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:

Thus it isn't the same thing as a personality type only because that type prior to its manifestation is not perceivable.
Click to expand...

Of course it is perceivable. That's what surveys/questions are for. I'm not a psychologist but my understanding is that various 'general' questions would be asked about how individuals relate to others, how individuals make decisions, etc, and then the personality type is determined/perceived. Without yet getting into the manifestation of choosing red sports cars and reading Shakespeare versus choosing beige minivans and reading Kerouac.
 
originally posted by Rahsaan:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:

Thus it isn't the same thing as a personality type only because that type prior to its manifestation is not perceivable.
Click to expand...

Of course it is perceivable. That's what surveys/questions are for. I'm not a psychologist but my understanding is that various 'general' questions would be asked about how individuals relate to others, how individuals make decisions, etc, and then the personality type is determined/perceived. Without yet getting into the manifestation of choosing red sports cars and reading Shakespeare versus choosing beige minivans and reading Kerouac.
Click to expand...

You are now arguing about whether my claim is empirically correct, not whether I was making the claim I was in fact making. I leave that argument to be decided by those who are specialists. My point about Brad's original connection is still the same: it's silly.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:

My point about Brad's original connection is still the same: it's silly.
Click to expand...

Wait, you can't make generalizations on six billion people by studying forty-five of them? Say it ain't so!
 
originally posted by Brad Kane:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:

My point about Brad's original connection is still the same: it's silly.
Click to expand...

Wait, you can't make generalizations on six billion people by studying forty-five of them? Say it ain't so!
Click to expand...

When Glendower brags to Hotspur that he can call spirits from the vasty deep, Hotspur answers
Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them?

Sure you can generalize from forty-five people, and so can I or any man; but will the generalization work when you do call on it?
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
What about those with no personality at all?
Click to expand...

And what about those with personality disorders? I think they drink gamay from the Loire and Chardonnay from Jura.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top