I am not convinced you have actually learned your lesson here. You still sound extremely condescending. This sounds like a post from /r/iamverysmart. Leadershi

I am not convinced you have actually learned your lesson here. You still sound extremely condescending. This sounds like a post from /r/iamverysmart. Leadership and emotional intelligence are part of intelligence. Have you thought that maybe, instead of all of your coworkers not understanding, that YOU are the one that doesn't get it? > In actuality I now know that I have acted like this (not always but sometimes) and I take ownership of it. Have you taken ownership? In this post, you are still trying to justify your abusive behavior by building it up with some kind of pseudo-intellectual BS. "As the genius-king of (random FAANG), I must be gentler with my subjects. I can see now why the NPCs were upset by my mental lashings." Also, you still cast a lot of the blame on your co-workers for "not being smart enough" instead of owning up to your own antisocial behaviour. > I was too harsh and I ignored emotional data. Emotional data? Do you mean the feelings and thoughts of the people around you? "Ignored emotional data" - I didn't care about how my co-workers felt, just that I ended up being the person who looked the smartest in the end. > In trying to be objective, I tried to keep things logical and data based always; I would get upset when people could not follow a logical line of thought. I seriously doubt that at a FAANG people "could not follow a logical train of thought." Maybe you just were not as convincing or clear as you thought you were. Or maybe people were just tired of you and the way you treated everyone, and you burned all good-will when trying to get your agendas passed. Also, here, you still make it other people's fault. "I would get upset because they were dumb." No. It is not their fault you struggled to communicate. It is not their fault you cannot control your emotions. That is your YOUR problem. You can kick and scream all you want, but YOU have to go to the world, the world will not come to you. > I often used, in a modified way, the Socratic method to show someone that their argument was wrong. This led people to feel I was disrespectful to them because it would force a contradiction. By doing this, I meant to teach them but I was wrong; it simply made people feel foolish. I ignored the emotional side of things and that’s a big problem for me. This is the big one for me. "using the Socratic method to show someone that their argument was wrong" is incredibly pretentious. You are not their professor, these are not students. These are adults with degrees and jobs. Who have been through tragedy and triumph and built up at least a nugget of wisdom ( hopefully ). Not your peons to whip with "Socratic method" that makes you feel oh-so-smart. People have pride, and what your describing completely ignores that. In fact, it seems like it is seeking to HARM their pride. "using the Socratic method to show someone that their argument was wrong" - Is that what you were doing? Or were you forcing people to play your weirdo sociopath games for longs periods of time? It sounds like you would trap them in a room and be an unpleasant sociopath instead of just explaining your reasoning like an adult. You really do not seem to value other people or consider their thoughts AT ALL. You seem to think you are the only person with a brain. Me, personally: I would have seen through the Socratic method BS immediately, I would have found it extremely condescending, and it would have pissed me off. > It’s also not true that I would never concede I was wrong. You just had to have a really strong case. So you would just argue until you won. Contgratulations. You sound like a lot of fun to work with.