Or to put it in words you understand...don't dehumanize them. Humanize them.
I see where you're going. Look at them as a person rather than not-person. As an individual. This, of course, raises all sorts of philosophical questions about what is "person"? Here's my point. Let's assume that the definition of person is homo sapiens. Even in that definition, it is impossible to model all behaviour of 7 billion members. If you are unaware of the possibility of an outlier like a ASPD, then you look at their behaviour based on the motivations of you and the motivations of others. All that's happened, is that I've EXPANDED my model of "human" to include certain characteristics I did not previously deem possible.
you do not need to know it. you can just start off blank. but you worked with them for so long, you shouldn't be starting off blank.
just imagine disorders do not exist. and all there is are personality traits.
and an asshole is most definitely not a synonym to psychopath.
"It's almost impossible."
Someone with rigid views can be pushed, you just have to push them in terms that they understand in advance, speak their mind's eye's language.
bpdORasd: "my boss immediately above me has recommended me for promotion twice only be told that I won't be promoted because I lack "emotional intelligence"."
This is pretty great, considering your username and all.
As for gas lighting, it thrives on you being the sole source of information in their lives. Means of steering them away from your agenda need to be out of the picture so that all they can know is what you want them to know. Good luck doing that with someone who is your better~
bpdORasd: "For now, being able to identify group behaviours and testing reactions against them is the first step towards greater flexibility later."
I'd argue that's the first step to becoming a rigid generalization-prone thinker.
When you are seeking specific answers with conviction, it becomes far more likely that you will ignore hints of the contrary. Tunnel vision and confirmation bias are nasty things.
bpdORasd: "What I'm after is pure, sweet unadulterated justice of revenge."
Nothing good will come of it.
bpdORasd: "ASPD's do this naturally."
You give a personality disorder far too much credit.
bpdORasd: "The good news is that I really have next to nothing to lose."
Having someone willing to be a recommendation while seeking out future work is valuable.
Piles the Beaver: "but it's tragic that this kind of thought, becoming "ASPD" to make it in your career"
I still don't get how some people see it as more of a philosophy than what it actually is. Even with all the hype the "gains" aren't only advantages. I can only imagine such idolization of it coming from pure hype.
Piles the Beaver: "Emotional intelligence does not come from borrowing someone else's. It comes from understanding your own."
This. So much this.
bpdORasd: "For those of us who weren't even aware of the existence of the ASPD pattern, the label IS needed as a starting point so that we can recognise the behaviour."
No, you learn their personality first and then see where it leans. To do it the other way around is both dumb and lazy.
bpdORasd: "If you aren't aware that something even exists, how can you identify it?"
Understanding labels only helps you understand people you already know. To use the label to judge someone primarily is very self-blinding. Knowing how they work without a label will, if it's genuine, grant you the same results anyway.
Synthetic: "People aren't games. Or are they?"
They are, but not all games are fun.
Synthetic: "If someone "is the game" and you want to play, learn to cheat."
Ehhh, I only disagree related to that making it become less of a challenge. If it stops being fun though, yeah.
bpdORasd: "Piles gave me incoherent mumbo-jumbo that was not aligned with the point of discussion, and used devaluation to try and drive his point home."
Just because you don't like it doesn't make it "mumbo jumbo".
Synthetic: "Or to put it in words you understand...don't dehumanize them. Humanize them."
“Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?†― Abraham Lincoln
Got to love messages that center around influence.
Gaslighting an individual is a matter of making them feel good, and then making them feel like shit, thus making you the one in control, as you become the one who controls how they feel. Temperament is not so much a factor in gaslighting as understanding a person's propensities and desires is.