5 ms·
Along the same lines, I like: Whether good or evil, the morality of a sociopath is something he or she takes responsibility for. Then later: More people taki
by RevRal 17y ago
Along the same lines, I like:
Whether good or evil, the morality of a sociopath is something he or she takes responsibility for.
Then later:
More people taking individual moral responsibility is a good thing.
- Daishiman 17y agoSociopaths do not assume responsibility for anything they do. They absolve themselves of the consequences because one of the definitions of a sociopath is that he has no regard or compassion for other beings. To a sociopath there is no other justice other than whichever favors him the most. The blogger in question has evidently read little to no literature on the subject. It is interesting to note that over a fourth of all convicts display sociopathic characteristics, among them a complete lack of remorse for their actions.
- gaius 17y agoYou have to read the first article in the series to get his definitions, sociopath, loser and clueless have specific meanings in this context. I agree that player, pawn and spectator would have been better.
- Mz 17y agoHere is another excellent one and I think a big part of why he is defining "sociopath" in amoral terms (because no matter your traits, they can be used for good or evil): If the clueless often go “evil” in the “we were only following orders” mode, losers often go “evil” in bystander mode,