I don't find trust to be overrated. Most people cannot be trusted, but some people can and should be trusted sometimes.
Mollie stated: source post
Do you trust the butcher, banker and dentist as people, or do you trust the regulated system in which the transactions you have with them take place?
Are you implying that butchers and postmen are not people?
Of course word goes around, that's called 'reputation'. But short of that, there's this element of human nature called 'pride in one's trade'. Has nothing to do with the 'regulated system' you speak of. Still leaves a wide scope for error, but that's where you gotta trust your own instincts
If your sister cooked your cat, would you be butt hurt? ;)
More than butthurt, I'd be downright pissed off. But then again, if my sister was the sort of person to cook cats in microwaves, i wouldn't have any ties with her, blood-relation or not.
The author seems to have a decent understanding of what he is talking about. But having researched personality and neurological disorders for some years now, I did find some things I just could not agree with. I'll quote them and explain my contentions.
"To get into more detail, sociopathy arises when a deep bond shared with someone is broken by the person with whom it is shared."
There are several roads to AsPD. Sometimes, just being around someone with the traits growing up is sufficient. Severe psychological trauma of all sorts can also transform a person into a sociopath. Said trauma does not necessarily need to occur during childhood. AsPD can even form from feeling one cannot control their environment (I do not specifically mean home environment).
"We can't recover from that, so we change. We adapt to expect this behaviour from anyone - after all, if the person we bonded with can cause such a thing, what the fuck will stop anyone else in the world?"
This is a blanket statement. The author goes on to contradict this statement later in the article by saying that sociopaths can empathize. Hell, even psychopaths can.
"It becomes a game to us - the world, life, people. We've seen how ugly it can be, so we're prepared to be just as ugly if and when we need to. We don't feel sorry because there was no one to feel sorry for us. Fuck your feelings."
The edginess...
Onto what he describes as characteristics of both high and low-functioning sociopaths:
"Compulsions to complete an objective when set."
This will vary among individuals.
"Lack of interest in others' problems."
Have you ever looked at a problem as a puzzle? Or perhaps seen some potential gain from solving it? I am sure our author Corey meant they are not emotionally empathizing with the persons experiencing the problems. I would disagree with that on the basis of it being conditional, but I feel now is not the time for a tangent.
"Ego - more than a normal person, less than a narcissist."
Self-esteem fluctuates. Ted Bundy, who was considered to be a very egotistical man, was crushed by his first love leaving him. Additionally, people are predisposed to conditions such as melancholy. And naturally how we relate to our environments plays a role in how we feel about ourselves.
"We can (and will) rationalise absolutely anything we want to do."
Only people who want to live in fantasies of their own creations do that.
"We are obsessive."
I've never come across that in any literature about sociopathy. Only by anecdote, but anecdote should not be used to make generalizations.
"We can emulate emotional responses to a degree if we feel the need to, but we don't usually see the need to. What does happen, however, is that regardless of outward appearance, we absolutely never believe that shit ourselves. The feeling inside is so hollow it's hilarious; you know just how much bullshit you are slinging in that very moment."
This reeks of projection.
"We give objective advice to help you fix problems so you can stop telling us about it. It usually isn't sugar-coated and may not be what you want to hear, but such is life. Unless we need to keep you in a specific state, that is."
Another blanket statement. Sometimes giving emotional support is much more productive than "objective advice."
"No conscience. We know and understand right from wrong... We just don't care."
I would agree if he were talking about extreme psychopaths. Having lived with a sociopath, I could tell he had a conscience. Just not not as much of one as your average Joe.
"We do anything to get what we want."
I think our author is idealizing sociopathy because he considers himself to be a sociopath...
"We are scarily consistent."
Consistently inconsistent. One of the DSM's diagnostic criterion is "impulsivity or failure to plan ahead." Consistent with how they are? That I would agree with.
"We are loners and exist in our own world. Whether we are isolated or in a crowd, we just look at you through the window of our own invisible room."
Projection.
I am getting a bit bored now, so I will tie up with a few comments about some other things he said.
"Sociopaths want to control a situation while psychopaths, from what I've seen, want to control the people."
Sociopaths want a sense of control. The classical psychopath has no endgame. It may involve controlling people and it may not. There is such a thing as a "pro-social psychopath" (think fireman, police, surgeons who live normal lives).
"So, what exactly is the definition of Sociopathy? One big trust issue and a giant fuck you."
Again with the edginess...
Turncoat stated: source post
the comparisons allow their sentences to be finished for them.
Ever noticed how some of them get all huffy and offended by that, and some others are genuinely thankful and relieved for not having to scramble for the expression they were looking for to finish the sentence?
Mo Fo stated: source post
Are you implying that butchers and postmen are not people?
No. (Is your reading comprehension ok?) I was asking why you trusted people you said you “don’t even quite know let alone like� You still haven't explained that. I’m pointing out your inconsistent reasoning but I'm getting bored as I can see this will go nowhere.
You began with …
“Trust is grossly overratedâ€
You then stated…
“I have multiple trust-based relations with people i do not even quite know let alone 'like', like the butcher / bank clerk / dentist / postman / & you name it. I trust them per default…“
“…Still leaves a wide scope for error, but that's where you gotta trust your own instinctsâ€
It seems that trust is not as overrated as you originally stated.
that many of the puzzles people are can be assembled from pieces across all you've met on a deeper level, each factor like puzzling together reruns across multiple shows that you've already seen.
Books, in short. (Plays included.) From folk/fairy-tales onwards; by the time you reach reading age, the tales set you up with all the basic default dramatis personæ you'll encounter in life. Never-ending story & all that.
That's why the current tinkering with and censorship of 'children's literature' complying to Health & Safety / PC legislations yields really dire repercussions, also known as "dumbing down".
Well you stated this, as if it was some objective fact:
Mollie stated: source post
Trust, and lack of it, ultimately determines the depth of any relationship.
I do not think either (trust or the lack of) would ultimately determine the depth of any relationship. To a certain extent / various extents, no doubt it could. But ultimately?
Mollie stated: source post
You said 'trust is over rated' and to me that implies that you do not understand the very basics of human relationships or how they are formed
Likewise. Your first statement implies to me that you do not understand the very basics of human relationships or how they are formed.