[ksbms]

(08-02-2018 04:45 PM)birthday cat Wrote:  

^ So what is better?

It's only one model but it is the most researched and validated model according to experts like Jordan Peterson, Geoffrey Miller, and I probably talked to some guys on this forum who are very knowledgeable about this topic before I posted about it.

I've used another model extensively but I'm learning the big five because many experts say it's the best model.

Your theory is the big five is of "limited use" but I used a less accurate model and I had great successes which prove that lesser model isn't of "limited use".

[...]

If somebody has something better then please share it. If nobody has anything better then do we really know as much about relationships as we think we do?

All models are wrong (but some are useful). I am suggesting to be cautious of jumping to conclusions and taking them too seriously, based on some conceptualisation of some scientists and extrapolating it too much. Big five has very shaky grounds, for it's based on lexical hypothesis. There's a lot of criticism to it, but, in a nutshell, the posited traits and predispositions that people are supposed to have, are based on the vocabulary that they use (and which is prone to social bias). There are methodological and interpretive problems, not to mention that the whole Big Five inventory was designed to test specifically academic behaviour only. On top of that, general explanatory and predictive power in the realm of evidence based psychology is far from six or even five sigma we can observe in physics. In other words, it's like figuring out by smell there's fresh bread in a bakery without being able to tell what flour has been used.