@metal-brainsaid Most scientists must be more open minded than those on this forum then. Most on here are so conformity driven they will resort to BS instead of admitting they are wrong, all in an effort to maintain the status quo.
I sometimes offer theories that depart from the status quo to find out how they might be flawed. I have no problem being proven wrong, I have a problem with ...[text shortened]... as well.
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."
-Albert Einstein
If conformity was the problem, there would be no need for the BS.
@deepthoughtsaid Members of the dark triad do not lack all empathy. What they lack is what psychologists call affective empathy. They do have cognitive empathy - they would be utterly unable to manipulate people if they did not. Now, Kissinger may well lack affective empathy, I don't know, but one feature is that it's intuitive and immediate. Since Kissinger isn't present when the bat ...[text shortened]... -holes". I'll judge these people on what they've done, not what psychological conditions they have.
So if a man orders an assassination he is perfectly normal? You are an apologist for evil.
Your claim of me abusing people on this forum is pure hypocrisy. You have observed humy being abusive on a habitual basis and you have condoned it for a very long time. You witnesses other being condescending without provocation and the only one who defended that guy was me, not you or anyone else on this forum. Then you defend him later after all his abusiveness. Is humy your brother?
I noticed you don't want to play Machiavellian or evil. I suspect that is because it would expose your blatant hypocrisy. Either that or you consider yourself one of those a-holes even though I never implied you were one until now.
You didn't even admit Zarqawi was a psychopath. Isn't that what is commonly reported? Didn't he allegedly behead people himself?
@wildgrasssaid If conformity was the problem, there would be no need for the BS.
Defending a popular position is a cowardly way of operating. It is a safe bet for those that take this easy way out. That is why people have a tendency to defend the status quo. It is easier than actually having to think for one's self.
Taking that position is the easy part. Defending it when that position is wrong is the challenge, although deepthought and humy never knew that going in. That is why they keep stepping on their dicks.
@metal-brainsaid So if a man orders an assassination he is perfectly normal? You are an apologist for evil.
Your claim of me abusing people on this forum is pure hypocrisy. You have observed humy being abusive on a habitual basis and you have condoned it for a very long time. You witnesses other being condescending without provocation and the only one who defended that guy was me, not ...[text shortened]... self?
I've made my last statement on your abusive approach to debating in the thread on Climate Change. If you persist I will carry out my threat and you are at the mercy of whatever the moderators decide.
You might find the two Wikipedia pages I've put links to below interesting to read [1][2]. Here's a quote from the caption to one of the pictures on the Wikipedia page on anti-psychiatry:
...the American physician Samuel A. Cartwright identified what he called drapetomania, an ailment that caused slaves to be possessed by a desire for freedom and a want to escape.
The problem with trying to label Kissinger as a psychopath is that it reduces rather than increases his culpability. People with perfectly normal psychologies have been known to do evil things. I'm sure you do not want a world where people are incarcerated on the basis of psychometric testing. The reason why I am resistant to calling Kissinger evil is that I do not know enough about it. I am resistant to calling him a psychopath because if he is as evil as you say then it's an insult to psychopaths who manage to avoid criminal behaviour.
@metal-brainsaid Defending a popular position is a cowardly way of operating. It is a safe bet for those that take this easy way out. That is why people have a tendency to defend the status quo. It is easier than actually having to think for one's self.
Taking that position is the easy part. Defending it when that position is wrong is the challenge, although deepthought and humy never knew that going in. That is why they keep stepping on their dicks.
Scientists have a strong incentive to challenge the status quo: new, surprising results are far more likely to get published in high-impact journals and receive a high citation count than results that only provide minor new insights. The reason that an overwhelming majority accepts anthropogenic climate change is that the evidence in favour of it is extremely strong. The reason your claims are being challenged is that you are almost always wrong and poorly informed about the subject matter at hand.
@metal-brainsaid Defending a popular position is a cowardly way of operating.
-even if the 'popular' position just happens to be correct?
Is it 'cowardly' to say the Earth is round as opposed to flat because round-Earth is the 'popular' position?
I disagree.
How 'popular' a position is has nothing to do with it. Whether the position is correct is what is relevant.
@deepthoughtsaid I've made my last statement on your abusive approach to debating in the thread on Climate Change. If you persist I will carry out my threat and you are at the mercy of whatever the moderators decide.
You might find the two Wikipedia pages I've put links to below interesting to read [1][2]. Here's a quote from the caption to one of the pictures on the Wikipedia page o ...[text shortened]... .wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-psychiatry
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_psychiatry
Machiavellian or evil?
The list I gave you included hit men/assassins. You can't avoid answering based on the false claim none of them carried out the killings. Mussolini reportedly stabbed his classmates with knives when he was a child. You can't even admit it was likely he was a psychopath?
Mussolini: Machiavellian or evil?
Being right doesn't make me abusive. Being wrong because you accepted too many rumors as fact doesn't make you a victim. You need to own up to your mistakes instead of blaming others for them. I'm sure you would be a lot happier if you were proving me wrong.
Just because a psychopath manages to avoid criminal behavior doesn't mean they are not a psychopath. Killing people is a good indicator of that though.
@kazetnagorrasaid Scientists have a strong incentive to challenge the status quo: new, surprising results are far more likely to get published in high-impact journals and receive a high citation count than results that only provide minor new insights. The reason that an overwhelming majority accepts anthropogenic climate change is that the evidence in favour of it is extremely strong. The ...[text shortened]... challenged is that you are almost always wrong and poorly informed about the subject matter at hand.
" The reason that an overwhelming majority accepts anthropogenic climate change is that the evidence in favour of it is extremely strong."
That is because most people are ignorant about the subject. Climate scientists are more informed. The opinions of people who think the ice core samples prove CO2 caused temps to rise mean nothing. Only people who know that cause and effect is the reverse of that are qualified to have an informed opinion.
The majority of climate scientists have never been polled to find out their opinion on natural vs anthropogentic causes. Assertions that they were is a myth.
The list I gave you included hit men/assassins. You can't avoid answering based on the false claim none of them carried out the killings. Mussolini reportedly stabbed his classmates with knives when he was a child. You can't even admit it was likely he was a psychopath?
Mussolini: Machiavellian or evil?
Being right doesn't make me abusi ...[text shortened]... behavior doesn't mean they are not a psychopath. Killing people is a good indicator of that though.
It is the way you insist on calling people a liar when they make factual statements you find egodystonic.
If what you say about Mussolini is true then psychopathy is likely. That kind of behaviour in a child would be highly alarming as far as future prognosis is concerned.
@deepthoughtsaid It is the way you insist on calling people a liar when they make factual statements you find egodystonic.
If what you say about Mussolini is true then psychopathy is likely. That kind of behaviour in a child would be highly alarming as far as future prognosis is concerned.
Do you really think Dr. Evil Kissinger is any different than an organized crime boss? Let's play a game called "Machiavellian or evil?"
Gaddafi
Abe Lincoln
Mussolini
Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi
Milosevic
Stalin
Hitler
Mao
Leopold II
Joseph Meldish
Saddam Hussein
Shah of Iran
MBS (Mr. bonesaw)
Chester Wheeler Campbell
Pinochet
Jimmy Carter
Ronald Reagan
Carlo Gambino
James Joseph "Whitey" Bulger Jr.
Osama Bin Laden
@metal-brainsaid Yes. Lack of empathy is a basic form of psychiatric condition. We have different names for the different degrees of apathy. There is the narcissist, sociopath and psychopath. One could argue these are just a bunch of fancy names for a-holes, but Kissinger is just evil. You have euphemisms for evil to condone it when your news sources desensitize you to it.
Do you reall ...[text shortened]... bino
James Joseph "Whitey" Bulger Jr.
Osama Bin Laden
Which are they? "Machiavellian or evil?"
I notice you didn't put Trump's name on that list. Why is that? Do you seriously think he has some form of empathy for people?
Are most scientists sniveling fearful conformists?
03 May '19 18:18
Back to Top