3 ms·
I learned nothing from this article but that neuroscience and psychology don't really have any concrete definition for psychopathy and they don't seem to have m
by dreamdu5t 13y ago
I learned nothing from this article but that neuroscience and psychology don't really have any concrete definition for psychopathy and they don't seem to have much predictive insights on it at all. Fascinating.
- RodericDay 13y agoJon Ronson has a fairly decent book called "The Psychopath Test" that you may find interesting. It will basically reinforce your intuition though.
- jrs99 13y agoyou know what's interesting is that i've been seeing a lot of psychopath books out there recently. Like a publishing trend, where people are riding on the success of some other book. kind of like that 10,000 hours thing came out and many books about it all came out at once. it makes me wonder if that's all that it is, a trend in publishing.
- thirdtruck 13y agoFrom what I've heard from writing podcasts, writing to the "current" trend is a fool's gambit because all those vampire books (for example) were purchased and in production for 1-4 years before they hit the shelves. Each house also knows what the other ones have in production and they tend to stack their releases, like with movie studios. In other words, there was probably a lot more hidden momentum behind Gladwell's books than anyone might admit or even recognize from the inside.
- tantalor 13y agoThere was some anecdotal evidence to support the prediction, “I’m obnoxiously competitive. I won’t let my grandchildren win games. I’m kind of an asshole, and I do jerky things that piss people off,” he says. “But while I’m aggressive, but my aggression is sublimated. I’d rather beat someone in an argument than beat them up.” I think the takeaway is that sociopathy might be more normal than we thought.
- jrs99 13y agoHe likes to win arguments. so maybe roughly 100% of humans?
- auctiontheory 13y agoHe likes to win arguments / so maybe roughly 100% of humans? Not at all. Some humans "argue" or "debate" to understand the truth of an issue, rather than to "win." In "losing," I actually learn more. I see that as the difference between mathematicians (truth-seeking) and lawyers (win-seeking.)
- nostrademons 13y agoA number of other people don't like to argue at all, or if they argue it's only to make people they care about feel good. They usually just let their opponent win, although sometimes after putting up enough resistance to make their opponent think it was a good fight.
- jrs99 13y agoi see that as more discussing and communicating than arguing.