Sociopath Community

Turncoat said: 

Xena said: 

It helped me a lot with norms and group think, and what not to say in front of mondo conservative types, tho. I had no idea. I mean no idea how much ppl were judging me on certain statements. My life got a lot easier after I learned to tighten up my brain-to-mouth filters.

You mean by learning how to be fake like the conservatives are learning how to do? 😞

 No. Just learning how to edit myself.

The entire world does not need to know about my every little brain fart.

I'm waaaaaay better in writing.

Me speaking is almost like a different person.

I have to be careful what I say bc my natural personality tends to attract psychos. People I don't want to know.

So yeah, it's way easier to just not say certain things.

Add my cookie monster eyes to the mix, and I'm surprised I lived this long.

And yeah, the humanist movement came from Jews who lived through WWII and had to treat the psychological wounds their peers suffered in concentration camps.

Do you ever feel like Pavlov's dog when you order food and they ring the doorbell?

It doesn't sound like it's a very useful theory. It's treating people like they're robots. All of the fluff and the vivid colors of Freudian psychology are gone. Has there ever been anything useful that came out of behaviorism?

There's talk of empiricism but it's like the theory gives up on foundational axioms and the rule of simplicity. If the foundational theory is so superfluous then what use does it have?

Ps. Did someone steal Buttered Toast's account?

Xena said: 

And yeah, the humanist movement came from Jews who lived through WWII and had to treat the psychological wounds their peers suffered in concentration camps.

Without knowing the origins of it, that is what I found distasteful about humanism when I first read about it: It's a sugar-coated feelgood psychology where the ends justify the means. I very much believe individuals can break down boundaries and walls they often think they can't, but masquarading these sentiments as a science with a moral twist feels like self-deception on the part of its adherents.

Bitch said: 

All of the fluff and the vivid colors of Freudian psychology are gone. Has there ever been anything useful that came out of behaviorism?

Conversely, aside from inspiration—what's useful that came from romanticism, or the otherwise ornate parts of psychology?

Tryptamine said: 

Xena said: 

And yeah, the humanist movement came from Jews who lived through WWII and had to treat the psychological wounds their peers suffered in concentration camps.

Without knowing the origins of it, that is what I found distasteful about humanism when I first read about it: It's a sugar-coated feelgood psychology where the ends justify the means. I very much believe individuals can break down boundaries and walls they often think they can't, but masquarading these sentiments as a science with a moral twist feels like self-deception on the part of its adherents.

 Yeah, it's no good for shitbag sociopaths, etc.

People who are wired in ways that leave them without empathy just laugh at it.

This approach is good for trauma survivors and some types of mood disorders.

I also try to use it as a go-to in all of my day to day dealings... at least until the other person turns out to be a shitbag  :P

Fortunately, this only happens about 50% to 60% of the time.

Average, neurotypical people appreciate kindness.

I've mentioned Maslow's Needs Heirarchy before. Not sure if you were around.

What do you think of it?

Tryptamine said: 

Bitch said: 

All of the fluff and the vivid colors of Freudian psychology are gone. Has there ever been anything useful that came out of behaviorism?

Conversely, aside from inspiration—what's useful that came from romanticism, or the otherwise ornate parts of psychology?

I don't know, is all psychology equally useless?

Xena said: 

I've mentioned Maslow's Needs Heirarchy before. Not sure if you were around.

What do you think of it?

It's one of those things where the idea is nice, but it doesn't seem that scientific. As in: Do I think many humans would find fulfillment in being aligned with a sense of purpose and security? Yeah. Do I think psychophysical and psychosocial development takes place in a pyramid-type structure, one layer building atop the other? Not really.

Martyrs and ascetists, for example, are actualized without basic needs met. Esteem seems more like an ego thing which doesn't require a sense of belonging, and plenty of eccentric geniuses were aligned with purpose without having much sense of belonging or being loved. I would argue that self-actualization is probably more of a thing for people high in openness to experience, or focused on accomplishment, and when you start trying to apply it to everyone, the idea of what actualization is becomes more nebulous until it's kind of useless.

Behaviorism = Rationalism(Empiricism)