5 ms·
If you're worried you might have narcissitic tendencies, don't worry too much: a real narcissist would never entertain such a notion. this is literally not tru
by fsckboy 4y ago
If you're worried you might have narcissitic tendencies, don't worry too much: a real narcissist would never entertain such a notion.
this is literally not true, research indicates narcissists know they are narcissistic
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/201103/do-narcissists-know-they-are-narcissists https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/2011...
http://www.simine.com/docs/Carlson_et_al_JPSP_2011a.pdf http://www.simine.com/docs/Carlson_et_al_JPSP_2011a.pdf
- eftychis 4y agoBut they are not worried about it -- usually at least.
- wolverine876 4y agoNarcissists are typically extremely worried, though they won't admit it, probably not to themselves. They are people who feel extremely vulnerable and insist that everything around them cannot threaten that vulnerability. Their kids, for example, have to make them feel like the perfect parent. Not a happy way to live, for them or the people around them.
- lowkey_ 4y agoOne of the most fun things about psychology is that everything sounds intuitive and obvious, even if wrong. There's an anecdote about a professor telling his students on the first day of a Psychology class, "some things about this field are obvious common sense — for instance, a baby won't recognize and prefer more attractive people as they're unaware of beauty standards." The class all agrees, and the professor says "JK, babies actually do! Welcome to Psychology."
- BlargMcLarg 4y agoI think you just described the problem with rational arguments in general. Great until evidence points out otherwise.
- whatshisface 4y agoCan an argument be rational if it is not founded on evidence? I don't think it is rational to adopt beliefs as a grounds for reasoning without any reasons for adopting them.
- failedengineer 4y agoGravity is not, in fact, the attraction of lesser mass to greater mass. Gravity is the repulsion of lesser mass by greater mass. In the case of the Earth, this means you are repulsed toward the Earth by the weight of the column of space "above" you, and are only prevented from falling through the Earth by its density. The Earth is relatively equally displaced by the column surrounding it, meaning you do not notice this effect. Gravity seems to come in waves because all things in the relevant column are moving, but the shifting of mass is almost unimportant to your perception because it is such a small value. The magnitude and frequency is such that it goes unnoticed to all but the most sensitive equipment. .... completely no evidence available, but, it sounds kind of reasonable.
- whatshisface 4y agoYou actually cited evidence in your example: >prevented from falling through the Earth >Gravity seems to come in waves >the shifting of mass is almost unimportant to your perception [...] unnoticed to all but the most sensitive equipment.
- failedengineer 4y agoPoint taken. With that in mind, yes, you're left with Shrodinger's cat.
- msbarnett 4y agoDepends on who you ask – there's a certain school of economists that insists that a sufficiently "rational" argument is in fact preferable to evidence.
- 4y ago
- ravar 4y agoIf I heard that on the first day I would have left the classroom before the professor had time to correct the statement.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- icambron 4y agoI almost did this in a literature class. I think it was the second day of the class, and we'd read James Joyce's "An Encounter". The prof read aloud sections of a published analysis of the story -- out of some big tome -- and asked us to discuss it. The analysis was so vacuous and absurd that I came inches from simply walking out, which would have been awkward because there were only like 8 students in the class. Mentally, I mapped out my path to the registrar so that I could drop the class and began checking out. After a bit of classroom discussion, from which I abstained, the professor threw the book in the trash (clang! it was a metal trashcan) and gave a speech about how the analysis was gibberish, and how you can't just make up stuff about what a story says. He then walked us through how you might actually obtain useful insights about what the story means to say. It was apparent he gave that spiel every semester. I'm glad I stayed; it was a good class.
- dallasg3 4y agoGood Will Hunting?
- adhesive_wombat 4y agoSounds more like Dead Poets Society with the tearing out of the introduction to the book of poems.
- adhesive_wombat 4y agoIf only there were a saying about not jumping to conclusions based on a small amount of information that was somehow related to books!
- 4y ago
- watwut 4y agoOf course this relies on shaky definition of "attractive". Some looks are found ugly quite universally. And others are heavily socially influenced.
- DFHippie 4y agoThis. Babies aren't born loving ritual scarification or sideburns but they may be born preferring facial symmetry and an even skin tone.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- hinkley 4y agoThat's some Willy Wonka somersault-level shit right there.
- ghostbrainalpha 4y agoI'm pretty sure that was just an attempt at humor. But your links are interesting nonetheless.
- coding123 4y agoI think that was a joke and two - the only part they worry about, however, is their image. That's not the same as a person worrying about how they have potentially treated someone else.
- passivate 4y agoThe article also says "In reality, all of us are at least a little narcissistic. ", so make of that what you will. Me personally, I'm always cautious when research people claim to have found "truths" about human psychology - which is temporal, transient, highly mutable, highly context-dependent and extremely difficult to generalize. Coming from a tech background which promotes algorithmic thinking, I have been more than humbled when trying to apply such conceptual frameworks to biological systems at my current job.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]