I came across an interesting way to classify people here. The problem with this model is that I believe that nearly every group believes people can be changed and that nobody is trapped by a bad nature. If they did not believe this, they would not waste time trying to convince others to get to the polls and vote in their favor.
Another way of classifying people can be found here. This breaks the authoritarian control dimension of the other one into economic and social dimensions. The problem with this one is that many of the questions asked had no direct relevance to how much state control one believes there should be over the issue. For example, one question asks whether I believe that one can feel naturally homosexual or not. Since homosexuality as I understand it is an affront against logic itself, I have to say no, but does this mean I want more or less regulation on this issue? I don’t think it’s any of my business. Another question asks whether some races are superior to others. Superior by what standards? How are races defined? By tribe? By species? The human species may be superior to others, but within the human species the term race is best replaced by the term ethnic group. Ethnic groups have different cultures, and therefore different practices and values. Some are obviously better than others, by whosever value system used. So I had to agree, but does that mean I want more or less regulation pertaining to race? How is that question relevant?
Does anyone have anything better?