Sociopath Community

Just said: 

I just didn’t use the same words you used to explain the same concept

So you didn't even read my post before acting offended then? If you care moreover that a "teammate" corrected you, then it's not an interest in accuracy but rather an interest in social politics.

Being wrong isn't the end of everything or whatever, it happens to the best of us and, this time, it happened to you. You're better off picking yourself up, looking over where the mistake happened, and then aiming to improve upon yourself in the face of that error. The only true mistake is one where you learn nothing from it. 

Hey iirc you got mad at me for being myself earlier too tryp. That’s the only defense I have for tc in this thread. I can’t even read his worthless gibberish responses anymore.

Chapo said: 

Hey iirc you got mad at me for being myself earlier too tryp. That’s the only defense I have for tc in this thread. I can’t even read his worthless gibberish responses anymore.

You might benefit from taking an English class. 

Turncoat said: 

Chapo said: 

Hey iirc you got mad at me for being myself earlier too tryp. That’s the only defense I have for tc in this thread. I can’t even read his worthless gibberish responses anymore.

You might benefit from taking an English class. 

 You might benefit from some writing classes. Your nonsense isn’t like literally unreadable it’s just constantly not worth reading. I feel that was about you blanc and Jesusperson too though. 

Chapo said: 

Turncoat said: 

Chapo said: 

Hey iirc you got mad at me for being myself earlier too tryp. That’s the only defense I have for tc in this thread. I can’t even read his worthless gibberish responses anymore.

You might benefit from taking an English class. 

 You might benefit from some writing classes. Your nonsense isn’t like literally unreadable it’s just constantly not worth reading. I feel that was about you blanc and Jesusperson too though. 

The way I write tested out of English courses in a college setting, and my grades in the subject were pretty good without really trying. 🤷

You see how long I can write for, papers were easy. 

Chapo said: 

Hey iirc you got mad at me for being myself earlier too tryp. That’s the only defense I have for tc in this thread. I can’t even read his worthless gibberish responses anymore.

Well what did you do?

Tryptamine said: 

Chapo said: 

Hey iirc you got mad at me for being myself earlier too tryp. That’s the only defense I have for tc in this thread. I can’t even read his worthless gibberish responses anymore.

Well what did you do?

 I don’t think it matters I just felt like you were acting like a hypocrite or something similar. Beyond that I don’t see anything you did as particularly wrong.

Just said: 

 All you had to do was agree with what I wrote, but you couldn’t even do that. I will no longer defend your position now or in the future. I won’t assume what everyone says about you is true, but I will no longer put effort into agreeing with you. Loyalty means nothing to people these days 😔 No one gets it at all. It’s how I know this world is almost over. Everyone sucks nowadays. 

Does that mean you only said what you did to score points with TC?

Integrity means nothing to people these days 😔

Are you a bit depressed? Positive people tend to be happy and think positive thoughts. QED, proof is in Kahneman et al. research. However, I was excited to find out about the following, too. Apparently positive people are also more likely to be gullible, and if they get a chance to push a fat man off a bridge in front of a train about to run over 5 people, they'll do it. Fascinating! I wonder if Hitler was a cheerful or an angry fellow.

Switch between ups and downs seems to be what Kahneman advocates for. That way, you get the benefits of being positive. It's highly advantageous in negotiations. To be positive, that is. A prime example is this debate right here! Had this discussion started off on a positive note, I'm sure we'd be in a very different place right now, instead of a stand-still. Wow... Kahneman is so smart. I am infinitely curious.

But then when someone is about to scam you, or you want to analyze a situation, then you should bring out the melancholic Russian inside of you. Is that cool or what?

Apparently, as it turns out, all our judgements are being guided by noise and biases. Hence all this disagreement. It's all Bayesian analysis. Ockham's razor would suggest we should unify statistics with philosophy and psychology. Kahneman would tell us now to vote who is right and why, and then sit on it for a few days, and then vote again. Only then do we statistically start averaging out our biases and the inherent noise in our decision making. But we should be serious about it, and assume that Tryptamine and TC aren't just trying to bring back people by stoking the fire. I should make a mental note, rallying people is easier when there's a controversy.

AppleGenius said: 

Just said: 

 All you had to do was agree with what I wrote, but you couldn’t even do that. I will no longer defend your position now or in the future. I won’t assume what everyone says about you is true, but I will no longer put effort into agreeing with you. Loyalty means nothing to people these days 😔 No one gets it at all. It’s how I know this world is almost over. Everyone sucks nowadays. 

Does that mean you only said what you did to score points with TC?

Integrity means nothing to people these days 😔

Are you a bit depressed? Positive people tend to be happy and think positive thoughts. QED, proof is in Kahneman et al. research. However, I was excited to find out about the following, too. Apparently positive people are also more likely to be gullible, and if they get a chance to push a fat man off a bridge in front of a train about to run over 5 people, they'll do it. Fascinating! I wonder if Hitler was a cheerful or an angry fellow.

Switch between ups and downs seems to be what Kahneman advocates for. That way, you get the benefits of being positive. It's highly advantageous in negotiations. To be positive, that is. A prime example is this debate right here! Had this discussion started off on a positive note, I'm sure we'd be in a very different place right now, instead of a stand-still. Wow... Kahneman is so smart. I am infinitely curious.

But then when someone is about to scam you, or you want to analyze a situation, then you should bring out the melancholic Russian inside of you. Is that cool or what?

Apparently, as it turns out, all our judgements are being guided by noise and biases. Hence all this disagreement. It's all Bayesian analysis. Ockham's razor would suggest we should unify statistics with philosophy and psychology. Kahneman would tell us now to vote who is right and why, and then sit on it for a few days, and then vote again. Only then do we statistically start averaging out our biases and the inherent noise in our decision making. But we should be serious about it, and assume that Tryptamine and TC aren't just trying to bring back people by stoking the fire. I should make a mental note, rallying people is easier when there's a controversy.

 Wonderfully said. And I agree, it’s all about balance. But, my fave bright eyes quote. 

‘If you say there’s no truth and who cares, how come you say it like you’re right’ 

and I enjoy that one a lot. Because it succinctly expresses a line of thought that I share, with that line of thinking. Which is like, hey, I recognize being balanced is one philosophical approach to thought itself, entertaining dynamic relationships between ideas, rather than adhering to one single linear thought but rather a multitude of sides all at once. But to insinuate everyone should think that way is not what I am going for, it’s actually quite the opposite! But this is just one approach, and I recognize that.