In the 5-factor model of personality, humans personalities are a combination of Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism.
These 5 factors are said to explain 60% of personality variation, which is not a good number. It is an old model. The 5 factors were not chosen through deduction or proof - the methodology was fundamentally inductive.
As free thinkers, we should question if there are other fundamental factors, and perhaps even if these fundamental factors are more fundamental that the 5 factors in that famous model.
I propose “aggression.”
There is a distinct impulse and behavior common to many animals to harm others of their own species and even nuclear family for personal gain. This is, in my definition, aggression.
We see it almost any time we watch a nature documentary. In the nest of birds, there is one little chick that steals all of the food and attacks its siblings that try to get food from the mother. The mother has to smack the aggressive child and prevent it from starving its siblings.
We of course see it with dominance games. And, indeed it might serve that role. But aggression is also a kind of impulse that appears to exist without any rationale.
It is fascinating to point out that, in many species, the vast majority of members are not aggressive, but a few are. And, that it doesn’t really exist in many species. And in some species, aggression is so extreme that sociality is impossible.
A good argument should be able to be made that humans have this capacity, and that it is not uniform.
It would shake up the existing 5 factors. Perhaps any new factor would shake it up. Aggression might be correlated (negative sign) with agreeableness and neuroticism, and correlated (positive sign) with Openness and Extraversion (by means of confidence).
In future articles, I would like to examine how Aggression relates to political philosophy, and make the case that aggression is bad for society and that many immigrants are actually aggressors.
