Comment on Authoritarianism acts as a psychological bridge for dark personalities, study finds
WesternInfidels@feddit.online 1 day agoOkay but it says:
It is past time to abandon the term “dark” as a descriptor of antagonistic traits
And this is exactly what I’m advocating for, even if I’m approaching from another angle.
TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 1 day ago
“Look, I’m also suggesting we change course. I just happen to be suggesting we drive over a cliff, but the core idea is the same.”
I’m very, very glad that people vastly smarter than you are the ones with actual influence over this. Jesus christ.
WesternInfidels@feddit.online 1 day ago
Is there a name for the kind of personality that hurls uncalled for insults as a first resort?
TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 1 day ago
> Literally calls other human beings “defective”.
> “Waaaah. The meanie on the Internet pointed out that I’m acting like an utter moron and abusing the credibility of actual psychologists to make it look like my suggestions weren’t absurd.”
derAbsender@piefed.social 1 day ago
“This dark core encompasses several well-known traits, including narcissism, psychopathy, and sadism.”
Reading this, some sort of mental deficiancy seems to be at aand tho and should be pointed out, to establish that These are not normal traits that benefit humanity, in fact are dooming it.
WesternInfidels@feddit.online 1 day ago
I honestly don’t understand how you think that’s any kind of parallel.
I think “dark” is a problematic word, it’s sensational and attractive to exactly the wrong people, I think we should use another term.
As you point out, the psychology community has been contemplating a similar conclusion. Starting before me, I wager.
Somehow, this makes me a moron, though.
TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 1 day ago
The psychology community: “It’s inaccurate, sensationalistic, and stigmatizing.”
You: “Haha, yes, I agree. Let’s call human beings ‘defective’ instead. No stigma or sensationalism there. Nuh uh. I am very smart, and frankly, anyone who says my idea is obviously fucking stupid is contradicting the psychology community (whose opinions on this I’m literally just now glancing at).”
WesternInfidels@feddit.online 1 day ago
I think the psychology community is probably mistaken, outdated, or out of touch on the “stigmatizing” point. The TESCREAL assholes love to think of themselves as “dark triad” or “dark personality,” they fantasize about bringing about a “dark enlightenment.” “Dark” isn’t stigmatizing, it’s cool. It’s sensational. For that reason, I think it would be great to have a different term. One that wasn’t cool.
(A little aside here: You think the psychologists should be trusted to choose the most appropriate terms, yes? Where did the current “dark” terminology, which is apparently so problematic, come from? I don’t actually know the answer. Do you?)
So my suggestion was specifically to find a term that wasn’t cool like “dark” is. My focus wasn’t on avoiding stigma, because I don’t care if the sorts of people who would be happy to put me and my family in a concentration camp felt stigmatized. But hey, if you want to stick up for their feelings and dignity, you go ahead. You’re still free to do that. You will always be free to stick up for them.
So you don’t like “defective.” Okay. Maybe “antagonistic” would work.
The contrast you think you see is there because you’re not absorbing my point. Maybe that’s partly my fault. I think it’s partly your fault, though. You’ve charged into this with a chip on your shoulder.
Yup! Is that a scientific argument, though? Should it matter if I’m an expert or not?