I have always found the online quizzes and applications very amusing and intriguing. For one, they have a way to affirm themselves, much like astrological predictions, that they are indeed closer to truth than anyone else. When I came across the application called Google Yourself on Facebook I randomly used it to find out what it had to say about me, who limitedly makes use of the platform. I can indeed count the number of conversations I have in a month. At times there are none other than the usual catching up messages of how-have-you-been sorts whose disappearance is as sudden as its appearance. For the major part of my Facebook-ing time, I end up either going through interesting links or posting some write up or the other. Other than that, there is hardly anything that inspires me to even log into my account.
I do not intend to present a monologue here. All I am trying to do is to make sense of the result quizzes like “What kind of person are you?” or at times “Who you really are?” are based on. Although I had seen many amongst my friends take this particular quiz, I cannot recall their results and restrict myself to my own result then.
The application introduces me in the following way:
Pallavi is serious and quite by nature. (Okay. Fair enough. I am not as active as perhaps the social networking sites would recognise)
She loves to live peacefully-(Who does not?)
She is responsible in fulfilling duties. (uhhh okay. I was never asked to fulfill duties by Facebook or Google, but works in my favour.)
She has good concentration power. (Hmmm. Come again? Because I read articles and watch videos that really does not leave much space to concentrate on anything else.)
Loves to support and promote traditions and establishments- (Did not get this; beyond me.)
One thing that is common in this personality analysis is the generality of the remarks. In other words, the same can be said for a million other people based on their internet usage. Of course, there is some validity to the claim browsing patterns may and do highlight individual tendencies and one is more likely to browse the same things that one is attracted or interested in. My only point being, quizzes like these often tend to inspire curiosity as to how far can they “really” know us- something that really brings out the cat in me- and more often they tend to use these safe and all-inclusive categories that include and exclude you like some magic trick. It is after all a trick since the very generality means that it necessarily cannot be ruled out for your particular case; at the same time this also means that it fails to capture anything beyond the realm of the universal and general categories. Consequently, it defeats the very purpose it claimed- of stating the real you- that in turn created desire or just made one curious to click on the link.
For example, who on earth would not want peace? Secondly the subsequent statements seem more like being driven from the initial general statements rather than a real individual analysis. Therefore, Google Yourself, like has been my observation of most such applications, fails to capture the real me- whatever that means in reality. Perhaps, I will get two more coins for seriousness for this published article as well.
Image Source [http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-dRPgHYLlvuA/UBc7D5JNPyI/AAAAAAAAKdk/C-QlZeyqJDo/s1600/googleyourselfchallenge.png]