HSD Posted February 7 Report Share Posted February 7 It’s most likely considered perceptive to you as most of the rest of my post is too nuanced and complex. For those from a scientific or mathematic background your admission about this field is wild. Many psychologists try to pass off what they think as absolute fact and theories from this field have huge impacts on society. You yourself have gone on about things such as projection/compartmentalisation as if they are completely true but are now trying to walk it back as I’ve delved further into the issues than you feel comfortable with. As for your definitions, they’re a bit simplistic. Narcissistic rage is more akin to a social dissonance in which it is observed as external behaviour as opposed to the internal mechanism of cognitive dissonance. Hysteria is more of a delusion induced panic. Incitement isn’t done to create a reaction from someone - it’s done so that a dark triad individual can use and hide behind others who do their dirty work and build consensus in order to harm an individual. Maligning and smear campaigns may be the same thing but then again in many languages there are different terms for the same thing. Smear campaigns more often than not don’t involve projection. They usually play off stereotypes and wishful thinking or just straight up derision. If you want to discuss any topic in detail you can’t just use general terms or claim afterwards what you’re saying covered something unrelated. I’ve already pointed out in the BRICS thread the difference in the left wing and right wing use of language, including how left leaning universities encourage students and academics to essentially reinvent the wheel in order to seem fresh and original, even though it has become tiresome to observe for many. This is the other thing about psychology. You talk about specifics but when the details are scrutinised you roll back and say the issues are multifaceted. It’s clear many psychologists just say whatever suits their viewpoint and force the facts to fit as you have done with compartmentalisation which you are now associating with suppression/ repression. Either it has clear patterns or it is open ended in which case it is too vague to attribute. You can’t have it both ways. I would discount brain scans. In mathematics a number is a number and proofs can’t be disproved. In science an element will behave the same in a laboratory as it does in one of it’s naturally occurring states. Humans are not lab rats. People know when they are being observed and often change their behaviour accordingly depending on who they are around. It’s not hard to see that someone with dark triad traits most likely has an ‘autist mode’ they enter to help avoid detection. Any idiot should be able to figure that out. For example, in reality look at racists or islamists and how they act - on their own they are fearful, when with others like themselves they are provocative and when in front of authority they play the victim/innocent. How exactly do psychologists account for the variable factors in determining real world behaviour and thought? It’s certainly not by hooking someone up to a machine and waiting for a result. This sort of investigation isn’t much better than using lie detector tests. The thing about spectrums is that each thing on it essentially bleeds into another. It’s a weird term to use to describe autism as there are other things which are similar in certain components to it like Aspergers but are fundamentally different as a whole to an extent that they can’t be placed side by side. I think my views on autists isn’t exactly uncommon even if psychologists have convinced themselves otherwise. Time will tell. My comments about the sadist were solely in relation to your reliance on the concept of theory of mind. I was not offering a complete and thorough breakdown of this type of personality. There may be an element of personal energy to it but there is also the satisfaction gained from the simple inequality of the action they have committed. It’s an interesting area which you should look into. Going forward I am going to post some articles and essays from various places that may help add to the discussion. Just because I post it doesn’t mean I agree with everything said within or that I’m hiding behind it, rather it may help to understand the topic. Here is one: https://www.mindbodygreen.com/articles/what-are-dark-empaths I know it may be upsetting to have to engage in these long bruising discussions but I don’t mind as this is often the only way to really get people to delve into it rather than relying on whatever they usually have running around in their skulls. I don’t want this to come across as some sort of academic paper but I won’t tone it down just because some quasi-intellectual know-nothings get triggered by intelligent debate. I know some here want to keep Sikhs dumb but I don’t believe in that. There is a real danger that we Sikhs may end up with our own version of lysenkoism if we keep having to kowtow to the stupid or insane. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.