We may need another look at this.

Suppose my wife and I fight about who will do the dishes and she claims that in 60% of the houses the male does them after supper. Of course I’ll claim this is irrelevant and she should do them in our specific case. Similarly, I agree the ideology-psychology correlation is not relevant as an argument that may determine the Socialist-Capitalist discussion Neither side can use this as ammunition.

But I think it may be relevant for understanding the situation. Going back to me and my wife fighting over the dishes (say to the point we actually smash them on each other). Then, because of the noises, the neighbor comes in and explains that female hormones that are usually released at dusk, prevent about 60% of them from doing dishes. Now I think it is relevant. It doesn’t solve the problem because I still don’t think the man of the house should do the dishes (it’s against human nature and the Bible!), but at least I understand why she can’t do them now. So it helps me to come up with a more creative idea like “No problem honey – tomorrow is another day”.

I definitely agree that the Psycho-Ido correlation will not help us determine who – capitalist/socialist – is right or wrong. So as a tool (“ammunition”) in the discussion itself, this correlation is really not relevant.

But since we haven’t found any logical or empirical evidence that can conclude one way or the other, I suggested to look at things from another point of view – of personality. It is difficult (because we have to analyze ourselves) but I don’t think it is irrelevant.

In your example too, I think the interviewer comment is also relevant because it explains her point of view. Based on which I, the ambassador, may update my explanation to emphasis that Israel’s action is in self defense. I also might send an inquiry back to Jerusalem, just to verify that nothing we do is a result of some “marginal” tendency to violence.