Most of what I do is closer to inquiry than instruction, and that suits some people enormously while leaving others cold. It’s much better to find that out now than three sessions in.
What this is.
Twenty-eight statements about how you like to think, and seven readings that come out of them. It isn’t measuring ability: nothing here reads how capable you are or how much philosophy you’ve encountered, there’s no cleverness on the scale, and nothing is being graded.
There’s also no answer I’m hoping for. People want very different things from a conversation and all of them are legitimate. Answer as you actually are rather than as you think you should be, or this is worth nothing to either of us.
What you’ll get at the end is those seven readings and, more usefully, the places where two of them pull against each other. Liking depth while also wanting resolution isn’t a fault, but it’s a real thing that will show up in the room, and it’s better named early.
One thing I’ve done on purpose: I’m not telling you what this is getting at until you’ve answered it. Knowing what a question is looking for is the fastest way to stop answering it honestly, which is a well documented problem with instruments of this kind. The full explanation is waiting at the end of your result, and you’re welcome to read it and take the whole thing again.
An honest caution before you start: this is a bespoke fit diagnostic informed by established research constructs, not a validated psychological instrument, and I’d rather say so than dress a questionnaire in psychometric language. Treat the result as the opening of a conversation, not a verdict on you.
Your reading
Seven dimensions, each running from 0 to 100. The shape matters more than any single point, and the shape is what we’d talk about.
There is no good shape. A wide even heptagon and a lopsided star are both perfectly workable people; they just want different things from a conversation. What I read is where it pulls in and where it reaches.
Each dimension runs between the two readings named underneath its bar. A short bar sits toward the left-hand one, a long bar toward the right. Neither end is the good end.
The useful part. Not what each dimension says on its own, but what happens where two of them disagree, because that’s what you’d actually feel in the room.
Where the seven come from
| My name for it | What it draws on |
|---|
Bring this to a first conversation. The disagreements are the most useful part: if a reading looks wrong to you, that’s worth saying, and it usually tells me more than the reading did.
If this resonates.
However it came out, the reading is a conversation opener rather than a verdict. If something in it landed, or if you think it read you badly, I’d be glad to hear which.