Narcissism and borderline personality are both like, revelatory labels to read about. You're like, oh, shit, I know this person. This is an archetype of social dysfunction.
But all that does is tell us warning signs and tendencies for this cluster of similar problems, and maybe offer some interventions with a good track record. That's incredibly useful, but it doesn't make those labels some discrete, essential category of human beings.
I know we all know this, but we strongly tend to react to these diagnoses as though they are essential, discrete categories, and that is very true for sociopaths, and I think it is absolutely vital to be skeptical of essential, discrete categories for human beings.
It is incredibly tempting to wield labels like these for the purposes of dehumanization.
Narcissism and borderline personality are both like, revelatory labels to read about. You're like, oh, shit, I know this person. This is an archetype of social dysfunction.
But all that does is tell us warning signs and tendencies for this cluster of similar problems, and maybe offer some interventions with a good track record. That's incredibly useful, but it doesn't make those labels some discrete, essential category of human beings.
I know we all know this, but we strongly tend to react to these diagnoses as though they are essential, discrete categories, and that is very true for sociopaths, and I think it is absolutely vital to be skeptical of essential, discrete categories for human beings.
Yeah—when we as moderately educated laypeople say ‘sociopath’, we are referring to a pretty broad umbrella which includes people with some sort of brain defect from birth, people with some sort of brain defect from other causes, people with persistent bad patterns of behavior from birth (I mean also maybe this is a brain defect/we could call it that, but we don’t have to), people who start evincing bad behavior patterns after some event or as a result of being shaped by their surroundings, and even people who are currently temporarily displaying sociopathic behavior but haven’t before and won’t later.
In some cases it matters which category the person is in and in some cases it doesn’t really.
This is why I find a statement like "1 in 5 CEOs are sociopaths" kind of pointless, or rather a form of question-begging
It's basically saying "CEOs have a high chance of being assholes"
Like, of course! It's a job for assholes!
But the question of why people are assholes is a really difficult one (and very interesting) and, as Feral has said, almost certainly involves predispositions and genetic components and activation through abuse or trauma and etc
But like, that comment about seeing how many people don't wear masks showing that sociopathy is rampant
I think that's ridiculous! Maybe it's an off the cuff joke. But you don't have to be a sociopath to refuse to wear masks! People who don't wear masks seem to do so for a variety of reasons: they don't believe masks are effective, they don't believe COVID is real, they believe individual liberty is more important than even millions of lives and think the moral position is more important. Even that last one isn't sociopathic — it's just politically extreme, and probably combined with the other two to some degree.
We are EXTREMELY willing to blame a brain condition for social problems instead of blaming, you know, social factors.
I think there is a desire to be able to categorize people who do horrible things or have horrible priorities as a basic fact of living without relying on terms that nobody has any context for or terms that have been reduced to general use cuss words while still expressing that this is behavior that should be considered obscene.
But like, that comment about seeing how many people don't wear masks showing that sociopathy is rampant
I think that's ridiculous! Maybe it's an off the cuff joke. But you don't have to be a sociopath to refuse to wear masks! People who don't wear masks seem to do so for a variety of reasons: they don't believe masks are effective, they don't believe COVID is real, they believe individual liberty is more important than even millions of lives and think the moral position is more important. Even that last one isn't sociopathic — it's just politically extreme, and probably combined with the other two to some degree.
We are EXTREMELY willing to blame a brain condition for social problems instead of blaming, you know, social factors.
Social science reveals uncomfortable truths. While there's certainly reason to question the findings and methodology of social scientific studies, I've also witnessed plenty of straight-up social science denial: social science is not real science, social science is political and can't tell us anything valuable, and so on, which is really just euphemistic for "human psychology and social relations are not amenable to scientific inquiry".
What hubris! We want to look for single, natural causes that fit our preconceived understandings, when the world is so much more complicated.
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
As a neurodiverse person, ie an Aspie, I have that stereotype about having "severely reduced empathy".
Please don't confuse your inability to read my expressed emotions as a lack of empathy.
I was once told that I'm just making it up for attention because I didn't speak in a monotone enough voice and could make jokes and do presentations in front of 50+ people. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I also immediately want to ask "why is our society set up in such a way that it allows and encourages sociopaths/psychopaths/assholes to accumulate power and achieve leadership positions"
"Astrology for managers" is the best description I've seen of Myers-Briggs.
I want to once more point out that the difference between a ‘which animal are you’ quiz and astrology is that you do not get to choose what astrological sign you are, and you do get to choose what animal you feel most like. There’s a fundamental difference here, in that one type of quiz expresses, however obliquely, a person’s current self-concept, whereas the other is literally just your birthday.
Like we can definitely talk about whether we should use the results of a quiz telling you whether you’re a wolf or a sea slug to determine anything work-related, and also about whether we want people to arrive at that conclusion via quiz or via simple self-id, but saying that it is as meaningless as astrology simply isn’t the case (...and should you make the sea slug your sales team lead, really...?)
credeiki on
Steam, LoL: credeiki
+2
Options
SummaryJudgmentGrab the hottest iron you can find, stride in the Tower’s front doorRegistered Userregular
"Astrology for managers" is the best description I've seen of Myers-Briggs.
I want to once more point out that the difference between a ‘which animal are you’ quiz and astrology is that you do not get to choose what astrological sign you are, and you do get to choose what animal you feel most like. There’s a fundamental difference here, in that one type of quiz expresses, however obliquely, a person’s current self-concept, whereas the other is literally just your birthday.
Like we can definitely talk about whether we should use the results of a quiz telling you whether you’re a wolf or a sea slug to determine anything work-related, and also about whether we want people to arrive at that conclusion via quiz or via simple self-id, but saying that it is as meaningless as astrology simply isn’t the case (...and should you make the sea slug your sales team lead, really...?)
BRB, I'm finding out what my spirit animal is on Buzzfeed
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
I also immediately want to ask "why is our society set up in such a way that it allows and encourages sociopaths/psychopaths/assholes to accumulate power and achieve leadership positions"
"Astrology for managers" is the best description I've seen of Myers-Briggs.
I want to once more point out that the difference between a ‘which animal are you’ quiz and astrology is that you do not get to choose what astrological sign you are, and you do get to choose what animal you feel most like. There’s a fundamental difference here, in that one type of quiz expresses, however obliquely, a person’s current self-concept, whereas the other is literally just your birthday.
Like we can definitely talk about whether we should use the results of a quiz telling you whether you’re a wolf or a sea slug to determine anything work-related, and also about whether we want people to arrive at that conclusion via quiz or via simple self-id, but saying that it is as meaningless as astrology simply isn’t the case (...and should you make the sea slug your sales team lead, really...?)
Astrology has adapted to this by giving people various areas of flexibility to define themselves in a very similar way
If you can hold your nose long enough to look at """serious""" astrology I think you'll see similar stuff
+1
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
One of my co-workers told me once he believes he's a sociopath. With the way he tells stories sometimes, especially about some of the altercations he's had, I believe it.
But, like, he made a weight loss wager with me, that we both did horribly on, but he slightly less horrible than me and he told me at weigh in, when he'd won, not to worry about paying him the wager, that he felt bad for taking my money. I told him no way, I don't do that, and paid him.
But, I think about that, and about how he describes himself as a sociopath. Like, clearly it's way more complicated than that, and I try to remember that when I think about stuff like that.
My post about most people being sociopaths is inaccurate, for sure, but I think what I was going for was less about diagnosing, and more about how little empathy there seems to be when it matters.
I kind of have a strong dislike of the word "normal person". Nobody's normal, most people are just normal enough. I feel normative would be a better word when talking about human beings.
There's a Norwegian guy named Pelle Sandstrak, who had severe OCD and Tourette's, and of course there's the stereotype about how they always go SHITCOCK! out loud at random. Patently not a universal truth, but hey, stereotypes. I saw him live here once, and he's hilarious.
I like this guy's bit where he shifts the norm around.
"Astrology for managers" is the best description I've seen of Myers-Briggs.
I want to once more point out that the difference between a ‘which animal are you’ quiz and astrology is that you do not get to choose what astrological sign you are, and you do get to choose what animal you feel most like. There’s a fundamental difference here, in that one type of quiz expresses, however obliquely, a person’s current self-concept, whereas the other is literally just your birthday.
Like we can definitely talk about whether we should use the results of a quiz telling you whether you’re a wolf or a sea slug to determine anything work-related, and also about whether we want people to arrive at that conclusion via quiz or via simple self-id, but saying that it is as meaningless as astrology simply isn’t the case (...and should you make the sea slug your sales team lead, really...?)
Astrology has adapted to this by giving people various areas of flexibility to define themselves in a very similar way
If you can hold your nose long enough to look at """serious""" astrology I think you'll see similar stuff
Ah yeah I’m super not knowledgeable about that
If it can convey information about someone’s self-concept to all parties involved in the conversation, that’s good! (Someone’s just normal sign can, but only if they’re like ‘oh and I feel it does (or doesn’t) match me because I feel like I have xyz traits’)(...but also in conversation with me they’d have to explain what traits were what because I’m not familiar with zodiac conventions)
Again, I do think that it’s useful, at work, to talk about personality and work habits. “I’m gonna feel pretty drained after a big meeting so don’t expect me to do major technical work this afternoon” “let’s be real I gloss over some details can you check over this? That said, invite me to the brainstorming meeting, I have some ideas about the big picture of this project” are actual useful statements of personality and work (and are captured more or less by mbti, although people have to accurately self-id and both parties to the conversation have to understand what the terms mean)
Posts
It is incredibly tempting to wield labels like these for the purposes of dehumanization.
This is why I find a statement like "1 in 5 CEOs are sociopaths" kind of pointless, or rather a form of question-begging
It's basically saying "CEOs have a high chance of being assholes"
Like, of course! It's a job for assholes!
But the question of why people are assholes is a really difficult one (and very interesting) and, as Feral has said, almost certainly involves predispositions and genetic components and activation through abuse or trauma and etc
I think there is a desire to be able to categorize people who do horrible things or have horrible priorities as a basic fact of living without relying on terms that nobody has any context for or terms that have been reduced to general use cuss words while still expressing that this is behavior that should be considered obscene.
Social science reveals uncomfortable truths. While there's certainly reason to question the findings and methodology of social scientific studies, I've also witnessed plenty of straight-up social science denial: social science is not real science, social science is political and can't tell us anything valuable, and so on, which is really just euphemistic for "human psychology and social relations are not amenable to scientific inquiry".
What hubris! We want to look for single, natural causes that fit our preconceived understandings, when the world is so much more complicated.
I was once told that I'm just making it up for attention because I didn't speak in a monotone enough voice and could make jokes and do presentations in front of 50+ people. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Because that seems like a real problem!
I want to once more point out that the difference between a ‘which animal are you’ quiz and astrology is that you do not get to choose what astrological sign you are, and you do get to choose what animal you feel most like. There’s a fundamental difference here, in that one type of quiz expresses, however obliquely, a person’s current self-concept, whereas the other is literally just your birthday.
Like we can definitely talk about whether we should use the results of a quiz telling you whether you’re a wolf or a sea slug to determine anything work-related, and also about whether we want people to arrive at that conclusion via quiz or via simple self-id, but saying that it is as meaningless as astrology simply isn’t the case (...and should you make the sea slug your sales team lead, really...?)
I wish I could find it and I can't because the terms are so generic, but
There was a post on Reddit where somebody had posted screenshots from Tinder where they said
BRB, I'm finding out what my spirit animal is on Buzzfeed
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Prisoner's Dilemma?
Astrology has adapted to this by giving people various areas of flexibility to define themselves in a very similar way
If you can hold your nose long enough to look at """serious""" astrology I think you'll see similar stuff
But, like, he made a weight loss wager with me, that we both did horribly on, but he slightly less horrible than me and he told me at weigh in, when he'd won, not to worry about paying him the wager, that he felt bad for taking my money. I told him no way, I don't do that, and paid him.
But, I think about that, and about how he describes himself as a sociopath. Like, clearly it's way more complicated than that, and I try to remember that when I think about stuff like that.
My post about most people being sociopaths is inaccurate, for sure, but I think what I was going for was less about diagnosing, and more about how little empathy there seems to be when it matters.
Before Rowling's most recent foray into full-blown TERFism, we threw a Harry Potter themed sex party and I dressed up as Ravenclaw
but I was wearing Slytherin boxer-briefs underneath that just so at the right moment I could take off my pants and do a big reveal
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I just measured mine and I'm at 99.5
I think I might be calling in tomorrow
Just another thing Rowling has taken away from us
There's a Norwegian guy named Pelle Sandstrak, who had severe OCD and Tourette's, and of course there's the stereotype about how they always go SHITCOCK! out loud at random. Patently not a universal truth, but hey, stereotypes. I saw him live here once, and he's hilarious.
I like this guy's bit where he shifts the norm around.
it's really true
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Kinky book nerds?
I missed the boat but it sounds like a fun time while it lasted
"But... you're Ravenclaw!"
"Ah, yes, that's exactly what I wanted you to think."
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Ah yeah I’m super not knowledgeable about that
If it can convey information about someone’s self-concept to all parties involved in the conversation, that’s good! (Someone’s just normal sign can, but only if they’re like ‘oh and I feel it does (or doesn’t) match me because I feel like I have xyz traits’)(...but also in conversation with me they’d have to explain what traits were what because I’m not familiar with zodiac conventions)
Again, I do think that it’s useful, at work, to talk about personality and work habits. “I’m gonna feel pretty drained after a big meeting so don’t expect me to do major technical work this afternoon” “let’s be real I gloss over some details can you check over this? That said, invite me to the brainstorming meeting, I have some ideas about the big picture of this project” are actual useful statements of personality and work (and are captured more or less by mbti, although people have to accurately self-id and both parties to the conversation have to understand what the terms mean)
I'm a Libra on society
"Nah Slytherin.
Bout to Slytherin that ass."
Where do I buy these, I want as many as possible.
God I wish they were white bordered.
wait
The most famous people in the astrology community were born in March and April
everybody else stands under the shadows of those loomin' Aries
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I'm an Aries
I am 6'2
checks out
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Yeah but I'm a Gemini so there's two of us.
Suck it, Aries, you glorified goat.