Barack Obama is unique in American presidential history. By virtue of his biracial identity and international upbringing, Americans believed they were breaking the mold when they elected the first African American president in 2008. Yet, for all the distinctiveness of his life experiences, there is still something else that sets Obama apart in the hall of presidents – his innate, natural temperament.
According to personality psychologist David Keirsey, temperament is the part of our personality that we are born with. It is our default mode of perceiving and processing information, and it colors how we respond to, and grow through, the events of our lives. Keirsey theorizes that each of us falls into 1 of 4 basic temperament types: Artisan, Guardian, Rational, or Idealist. A person’s type indicates that they have particular character traits, values, motivations, skills, and decision-making styles.
In his book, “Presidential Temperament,” Keirsey examined the temperament types of forty U.S. Presidents and made a surprising discovery: in 220 years of elections, there had never been a president with an Idealist temperament. Despite the fact that Idealists comprise at least 10 percent of the population, no Idealist had ever occupied the White House — until Obama.
The reason behind Obama’s singularity in American history is a fascinating mystery, which can be solved by examining his life, his decisions, and his temperament.
Teachable Moments
A former community organizer and civil rights law professor, Obama is a model of what Keirsey calls the Teacher-Idealist. Teachers view all groups of people (families, classrooms, nations, etc.) as communities in which each member has a moral responsibility for the well-being of every other member. Thus, Teachers place high value on relationship harmony, and they make development of that harmony their chief aim.
Teachers believe their altruistic intentions are beyond reproach, so they feel justified in directing others for the benefit of the community. They are even prone to chastise individuals who they perceive as disruptive to the common good. To be sure, this mentoring style is quite effective in the classroom setting, but when Teachers attempt to lead their peers in like manner, they tend to appear paternalistic.
This tendency was evident in Obama’s remark that the Henry Louis Gates arrest controversy (and ensuing Beer Summit) could serve as a “teachable moment” on racial tolerance. For voters seeking leadership on race issues, Obama’s pedagogic approach might have been refreshing, but for others it seemed downright patronizing.
Listener in Chief
Teacher that he is, Obama has a reputation for being professorial, but his career in academia was focused more on facilitating learning than on conducting research. According to a New York Times report on his tenure at the University of Chicago Law School, Obama was a popular professor who fostered warm and challenging relationships with his students but never published scholarly works. One former colleague described Obama as a “thoughtful listener and questioner” who has “never stepped up to the plate and taken full swings” at complex ideological questions. This, too, is indicative of Obama’s Idealist temperament.
Teacher-Idealists do not attempt to push the boundaries of knowledge. They prefer, instead, to listen for ideas that match their value systems, then integrate those ideas into workable plans to help communities. Teachers typically demonstrate a mastery over sanctioned knowledge, and they are excellent communicators of nuanced ideas, but they are not particularly original thinkers.
Thus, during the health care reform debate, Obama was found delivering speeches, orchestrating town halls, and organizing yet another summit to explain, listen to, and question the competing ideas for reform. Even as his greatest legislative achievement was incubating in congressional chambers, Obama played educator, listener, and mediator while his advisors formed the policy.
Shaming the Shameless
Obama’s tendency to engage in dialogue with opponents can also be seen in his foreign policy, where he has insisted on reopening talks with Iran after 30 years of isolation. Obama’s favored approach in dealing with adversaries is not tactical or strategic, but diplomatic. He does not confront opponents directly with threats, or indirectly with Machiavellian schemes. Instead, Obama first attempts to forge common ground with enemies while maintaining the moral high ground. Here, again, Obama’s Idealist temperament emerges.
Idealists naturally see the humanity in others, even those who commit atrocities. They are not natural appeasers, for they hate all forms of injustice, but most American Idealists have never experienced firsthand the evils of despotism and have difficulty comprehending the possible depths of human depravity. They believe that anyone can change with the proper influences.
Idealists recognize that their own moral purity often induces shame in others, and they utilize this shame to inspire positive change. In fact, Idealists are so confident in this skill that they believe themselves capable of reforming even the vilest offenders. Unfortunately, autocrats and dictators are thoroughly debased and shameless, and they merely scoff at appeals for human rights, often catching the Idealist off guard.
Thus, Obama slowly and reluctantly authorized a half-hearted war on Libya, not for American interests, but for humanitarian purposes. Ultimately, Idealists will do what is necessary to stop evil, but they will exhaust all diplomatic channels before doing so, sometimes to the detriment of the mission.
Why Obama? Why now?
In “Presidential Temperament,” David Keirsey theorized as to why no Idealist had ever served as president, writing, “the political arena is, above all, a place of power, and Idealists find the pursuit of power inimical to what they see as their mission in life: personal fulfillment and the fulfillment of persons.” So what is it about Obama that led a power-averse Idealist to the highest position of authority in the world? One word: identity.
Obama’s life has been one of duality: he is black and white, American and international. For a young Idealist, whose driving mission is “personal fulfillment,” such identity confusion must have been unbearable. Obama’s identity crisis was evident in his admission that his adolescent drug use was an attempt to “push questions of who I was out of my mind.” For Obama, identity is paramount, and he eventually found his, not in being a member of any one group, but in being a bridge between groups.
Thus, from Hawaii to Indonesia, from Harvard to South Side Chicago, Obama has sought to integrate his worlds by becoming the personification of unity. That is what drove him to teach, to organize communities, and to pursue high office. His belief that he is the long-sought adhesive for a fractured world is what drives his presidency. It is the backbone of his policies, as he seeks to “spread the wealth around” and apologize to the world for America’s past.
Uniting rich and poor, black and white, East and West – all in the pursuit of personal identity fulfillment – is Mr. Obama’s curriculum. We, the people, are his pupils.
——————————
Sources:
David Keirsey, Keirsey Temperament Website, Keirsey.com.
Free Exchange, “Obama’s new-school paternalism,” The Economist.
Jake Tapper, “Beer Summit: Refreshing Race Relations?,” ABC News.
NRO Staff, Krauthammer’s Take, National Review Online.
Jodi Kantor, “As a Professor, Obama Enthralled Students and Puzzled Faculty,” NYTimes.com.
David Jackson, “Obama’s health care speech to Congress ‘” a truly rare event,” USA Today.
The Caucus, “Obama’s Health Care Town Hall,” NYTimes.com.
CNN Politics, “Highlights from Obama’s health care summit,” CNN.
Chris Frates, “Health care advisers show plan diversity,” Politico.com.
Lionel Laurent, “Are Ahmadinejad & Obama Ready To Talk?,” Forbes.
Alex Pareene, “Barack Obama: We’re in Libya to prevent a massacre,” Salon.com.
Associated Press, “Obama gets blunt with N.H. students,” Boston.com.
Mara Liasson, “Even-Keeled Obama Built Image on Bridging Divides,” NPR.
Jake Tapper, “Spread the Wealth?,” ABC News.
Charles Krauthammer, “Obama Distorts America’s Stance on Muslims,” Washington Post.
