Although most people do not take glee in being perceived as being “arrogant,” however, many male Rationals will admit they are not particularly bothered as being perceived as arrogant – well, because they are arrogant. No sense in denying the facts. Female Rationals sometimes get a moniker (deserved or undeserved – depending on your political religion) such as the Iron Lady, because of this perceived arrogance. With that arrogance, I suspect political religion was why Hollywood did such a hatchet job on Margaret Thatcher in the now playing biographical movie.
“Rationals are wont to think of themselves as the prime movers who must pit their utilitarian ways and means against custom and tradition, in an endless struggle to bring efficiency and goal-directness to enterprise, an attitude regarded by many as arrogant” [Please Understand Me II, page 169]
There are two ways to view the arrogant Rationals. Others can detect the arrogance of Rationals because Rationals don’t mean to be arrogant, but they can’t help it, and they can rub the other temperaments the wrong way because of their lack of tact and guile. Hence, Inventors, Fieldmarshals, Masterminds, and Architects are most *visibly* arrogant in that order. (Typically, of course)
Inventors tend to exhibit their “cleverness” and often don’t hide their impatience with others not as quick on the uptake, hence they appear to be the most arrogant to others. Howard Hughes was an iconic Inventor, and for those not familiar with him, the movie The Aviator is a great movie to see, as an illustration of a brilliant Inventor. Steve Jobs knew he was an “asshole” (so that is not news in his book) and his arrogance cost him his life. The arrogance of the Fieldmarshals is usually more implied and subtle, for they must take charge at work, being sure of themselves in enterprise. Examples, General Douglas MacArthur was famous for his well deserved confidence, but couldn’t hide his arrogance; and Neutron Jack (GE CEO Jack Welch) knew he was right, being too blunt, so earning his well deserved sobriquet. The Masterminds are usually behind the scene; they actually have the strongest will and demand incredible things from themselves. They know that others can not achieve the level of expertise they have obtained, and do not expect as much, hence a hint of arrogance. Moreover, they typically don’t exhibit their arrogance, except in their own area of expertise. Masterminds, Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke, are examples that people love to hate. Their motto is “I could be wrong, but I doubt it.” Architects are rarely encountered, if they talk at all, their arrogance is typically hard to detect.
All Rationals naturally see clearly mankind’s foibles, for they are the natural skeptics. And, they are their own worst critics of themselves. They do not expect or demand other people to be the same as them, so they don’t often really “deserve” being called arrogant, but they are arrogant, nevertheless.
For true arrogance – unseen by most non-Rationals, the order is the opposite: Architects are the most arrogant. You wouldn’t know it, unless you asked them, or you mistakenly wander into their domain of expertise. In the order of true arrogance, next are the Masterminds, then Fieldmarshals, and lastly Inventors. The often unspoken “hierarchy” of hard of science and technology gives us a hint of this phenomenon. Many Engineers are intimidated by Scientists including Physicists, who are intimidated by Mathematicians. (Mathematicians are intimidated by mathematics and Physicists.)
In reality, many Architects have the “humble” goal of understanding the world, and realize that most are faking understanding. We know that we understand better than anybody else, although we don’t say it – hence the humbleness. But, as my father has said, “If this is arrogance, then at least it is not vanity, and without question it has driven the design engineers to take the lead in molding the structure of civilization.”
When asked what if he had been wrong in his theory of relativity, Einstein (an Architect Rational) replied, “too bad for reality.” He knew he was right, logic dictated it.
Paul Dirac said: “I cannot understand why we idle discussing religion. If we are honest – and as scientists honesty is our precise duty – we cannot help but admit that any religion is a pack of false statements, deprived of any real foundation. The very idea of God is a product of human imagination. [...] I do not recognize any religious myth, at least because they contradict one another. [...]” Heisenberg‘s view was tolerant. Pauli had kept silent, after some initial remarks. But when finally he was asked for his opinion, jokingly he said: “Well, I’d say that also our friend Dirac has got a religion and the first commandment of this religion is ‘God does not exist and Paul Dirac is his prophet’”. Everybody burst into laughter, including Dirac.