Contact

It is obviously difficult to confront the issue that many matters are strictly taboo for the psychology professional. Not only are matters of love held to be “unscientific”, but the orientation of the homosexual is clearly off-limits for psychologists to discuss openly. It is very likely, that some day, something will come up which will convert such problems into divisions of simple, concentrated work in a logical format. That day is here. The mapping of generic traits can be done by the psychologist because it is the interview which reveals very clear details about human preferences. Rules of genetics are simple to implement when dealing with people chosen at random for interviewing.

Psychology has a lot to do with the emotional makeup of any type of human being. The problem is that no one trains high school students on matters of how to guide their emotions in avoiding a difficult marriage. Had Prince Charles and Princess Diana known such important details about their genetic makeup, they would have avoided each other and history would have yielded a different outcome. In reality, the issue is very simple.

A choleric person should never marry a melancholic person because such parties are emotionally opposite relative to each other. It becomes lucidly clear when defined genetically. The horror of such a mistake is similar to assuming that type blood “A” can be given to a recipient who has type blood “B”. The two are not compatible. Even though a man and woman are both very attractive, and both exhibit a “quiet demeanor”, the psychologist must admit that being attractive has nothing to do with the genetic nature of the emotional orientation of each individual.

These matters are, in fact, so elementary that the early Greek men of medicine (Claudius Galen and Hippocrates) were able to observe that there are (among all human beings) four emotional groups, or personalities, which were classified as “choleric”, “melancholic”, “sanguine”, and “phlegmatic”. Today, it is really not nice to classify anybody as being choleric or phlegmatic, etc. But these men of medicine simply used body fluids as a template for describing such various emotional orientations (personality types). All of this has scared most students of psychology into believing that these classifications are, in fact, antiquated and not useful. Anyone venturing into how four categories of emotional orientation may exist at any time in history will face the subtle question of whether such “personality types” are due to real genetic causes. Four categories quietly hints of a genetic cause.

It is the interviewing of people selected at random which reveals that, as a very comprehensive rule, choleric people prefer sanguine mates, sanguine people prefer melancholic mates, melancholic people prefer phlegmatic mates, and phlegmatic people prefer choleric mates. Because people who are admired can synergistically return love, it is difficult to assess who started the admiration in the first place. Thus the phenomenon becomes obscured. The interview always reveals three people: The person being interviewed, the type of person whom he or she admires, and the type of person who admires the subject.

Ideally, the psychologist should conduct the interviews. The problem is that rules of genetics should be injected into any analysis of a person under study. The emotional makeup of the human being should be appreciated in terms of what was inherited from the parents. The following is a description of events as reported by one of several interviewers: “In talking to people selected at random, easily those waiting at an airport, or waiting in line at blood donation centers, I would say that I enjoyed meeting people because I was involved in a new kind of research. If the person I was talking to could answer some very simple, non-intrusive questions (like what is your favorite color?, and do you prefer having a dog instead of a cat?), I could describe the qualities of the person attracted to him or her. And I could also describe the type of person he or she was genuinely attracted to. Most people were amused and somewhat reluctantly gave in and were prepared to be entertained. But when I described some very sensitive details, their mouths opened up, developed an uncontrollable smile, and enthusiastically agreed with everything I said. Now they truly wanted to continue the conversation. They would very gladly describe what their parents were like and answer almost anything I asked. If I asked for their blood type, they gladly gave it, if they knew what it was. They felt that the more personal information they gave me, the more I could tell them about their emotional matters.”

Then, the interview becomes a very powerful tool with which to assess the characteristics and medical problems which people have relative to their genetic makeup. It is a “goldmine” of biologically related elements relating to the human personality. It becomes very easy to determine the characteristic qualities of the parents of any subject being interviewed. In theory (and in the future), the interview should be replaced by a saliva test. However, before any of this can proceed, some preliminary real data needs to be garnered and documented adequately. If this is in any way interesting and if it appears that many questions remain to be settled, please see the full story by ordering the complete book from Lulu:

www.lulu.com