11–20 of 41 posts
In any case I have friends and family members with obvious psychopathic tendencies and while a fraction of them is ineed reckless as drivers, the majority is actually exceptionally cautious.
Iirc there was also a finding that learning about economics makes people score higher on those tests, so I worry they are more of an ideological tool than science. They may simply have categorized behaviors they don't like as "psychopath". I don't trust them.
That’s just the reality of normalizing casual psychiatric evaluations now days. I’m pretty sure there were Standford (or Princeton) psych professors casually diagnosing Trump with clinical narcissism on major news networks. If anyone has a any kind of spaz out moment, they are automatically bipolar to many people. It’s the true meta form of cancelling someone, it just hasn’t caught on just yet (not to that level at l…
Psychology also seems like an immediately scary example to me. I worry for example that "experts" can simply bypass the legal system by diagnosing people as "mentally ill" and having them locked away. Is there legal recourse for such a thing?
It's often the BMW and Audi drivers from my experience. When I see a BMW I know I shouldn't expect the driver to use blinkers. Interested if BMW actually cares about this perception of their brand.
I did read some research that showed they were more likely to jump red lights but I can't find it right now.
FTA: “The drivers with the highest likeability of being a psychopath were BMW drivers, with an average psychopathy score of 12.1 out of 36” The linked-to test says “The scoring of the psychopathy test is as follows: 0-18: No psychopathy” So, “most psychopath” is more like “least not psychopath”. The data also is based on self-reporting, but I’m not sure that matters much. True psychopaths might not have reservations…
those darn likeable sociopaths!
on edit: just found the typo funny.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s just the reality of normalizing casual psychiatric evaluations now days. I’m pretty sure there were Standford (or Princeton) psych professors casually diagnosing Trump with clinical narcissism on major news networks. If anyone has a any kind of spaz out moment, they are automatically bipolar to many people. It’s the true meta form of cancelling someone, it just hasn’t caught on just yet (not to that level at l…
I don't know how to put it without sounding like a conspiracy theorist, but I think eventually society really needs to reevaluate its attitude to science in general. Scientists have this elevated status, and naturally people try to exploit it. But everybody can call themselves a scientist, and even getting credibility by attaching to supposedly reliable institutions is not that hard anymore. It seems to me people are…
It should fall under libel. Matt Taibbi has spoken recently about how the media in particular have no fear of committing libel:
They will straight say certain things without any fear that someone might sue them for libel/character defamation. That link is a little topical due to the Rittenhouse case, but for many years they labeled Trump a variety of things on one side, and the right-wing labeled their targets in the same fashion on the other side. I’m pretty sure they also said Joe Rogan was taking horse medicine, which was a low blow. Well, not as low of a blow as insinuating Trump took part in Golden Showers (him pissing on girls, or vice versa, actual pee, if anyone needs to ask) in Russian hotels.
They don’t give a shit, and that’s just the media. Your average person now uses the same appeal to authority attack tactics in every day encounters.
What can you do if someone says you are toxic or __insert psychotic tendency here__ at work, in a relationship? The way we communicate seems to have shifted to the label being thrown out first, versus objectively walking through issues.
I don’t know, I have no answers honestly, and generally find this too exhausting to even try to dissect. I guess only Peter Thiel successfully launched a counter attack:
https://amp.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/11/peter-thi...
In summary, you need some dope lawyers if you want recourse.
How can electric be the highest scoring of that group, but electric only manufactures don't show up?
Statistically speaking, (and assuming no flawed data) that would suggest that the highest scoring electric vehicle drivers are biased heavily towards other brands. Or, there were no drivers from electric-only brands in the group.
BMW, off course. I don't need to read the article to know that...
I say supposedly because I have strong reservations about how worthwhile the definitions of sociopath are, as well as reservations about the parts of the field of psychology that deal with identifying personality traits in order to make value judgments.