(cache) SJW are all "Cluster B" personality disorder : BadSocialScience

Take a breath and chill out for a second. I made no demands, I simply suggested that the situation you've found yourself (which you clearly find uncomfortable given your initial hostile response) might be less aversive if you were able to support your claims.

I was personally interested in whether there was any evidence for your positions because, frankly, they sound a little out there. Psychology is my field though so if there was some truth to the claims then it would be incredibly interesting to read the studies.

If we're going to be honest with each other though, we both know that no such studies or data exist, right? And that's fine. Like you say it's a reddit comment and not an essay so you can say whatever you like, it doesn't all have to be evidence-based. Some people enjoy hyperbole to strengthen their overall point but the flipside is obviously that subs dedicated to badsciences will point out claims made about their fields that lack that evidence..

[+]niczar スコアが基準値未満のコメント-19ポイント-18ポイント-17ポイント 6時間前 (8子コメント)

I don't need to chill. You're simply, and rather puzzlingly mistaking amused contempt for hostility. I'm not saying you're a narcissist, but I've noticed these kind of people tend to interpret disagreement with hostility. Are you a narcissist?

As for the studies, well no, there are none with that specific focus that I know of. Again, this is just my moderately informed opinions, not a preprint. You can ignore them or contradict them, but instead you appear to be choosing ad hominem and demanding irrelevant standards.

That said I stand by my hunch that 1. social justice warrioring is merely the current incarnation of authoritarianism, and that 2. the social dominants who lead them are pretty much fiitting the usual definitions of psychopathy or NPD/HPD. If you want a cite, go read Altemeyer ("The Authoritarians", chapter 5), but you won't.

[–]mrsamsa 15ポイント16ポイント17ポイント 5時間前 (4子コメント)

I don't need to chill. You're simply, and rather puzzlingly mistaking amused contempt for hostility.

Just like you interpreted me extending a hand to help you as "demands" and " entitlement". I guess interpreting text is hard.

I'm not saying you're a narcissist, but I've noticed these kind of people tend to interpret disagreement with hostility. Are you a narcissist?

I don't think I am, I just thought walking into a discussion throwing insults at everyone was almost the definition of hostility.

Am I doing discussions wrong? Is that just a normal easy going approach to saying hi to people?

As for the studies, well no, there are none with that specific focus that I know of. Again, this is just my moderately informed opinions, not a preprint. You can ignore them or contradict them, but instead you appear to be choosing ad hominem and demanding irrelevant standards.

But the part I'm questioning is that you are moderately informed at all. It doesn't seem that it's based on anything at all.

And no there has been absolutely no ad hominem, I'm not even sure where that accusation has come from?

That said I stand by my hunch that 1. social justice warrioring is merely the current incarnation of authoritarianism, and that 2. the social dominants who lead them are pretty much fiitting the usual definitions of psychopathy or NPD/HPD.

These seem like very strange claims. I don't see how fighting for everyone to have a voice and not be discriminated against is an example of "authoritarianism"? As for your second claim, ignoring the fact that trying to diagnose people you've never met is bad science in itself, could you give some examples of specific behaviors that meet the diagnostic criteria?

If you want a cite, go read Altemeyer ("The Authoritarians", chapter 5), but you won't.

Well I've just had a read through and it was very interesting but most of the categories and scales he discusses seems to explicitly rule out social justice causes as authoritarian... did you mean to cite a different source or chapter?

[–]thatoneguy54Not all wandering uteri are lost 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント 3時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Cryogenian 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]jebuswashere 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 30分前 (0子コメント)

[–]niczar -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

These seem like very strange claims. I don't see how fighting for everyone to have a voice

That's what they claim to want. That's not what they actually do. See Christiana Hoff Sommers trying to talk at a university, or feminists pulling a fire alarm to prevent a MRA meeting, and so on.

and not be discriminated against is an example of "authoritarianism"? As for your second claim, ignoring the fact that trying to diagnose people you've never met is bad science in itself,

That would be bad science if I was claiming to be doing science, which I'm not. I'm seeing a pattern and pointing it out. I could be wrong. You could be pointing out facts that contradict my hypothesis.

Instead, you choose to focus on me and the errors of my ways.

could you give some examples of specific behaviors that meet the diagnostic criteria?

Most of the official diagnostic criterions would require having direct, intimate knowledge of the person. We have to instead rely on the image they project, which in the case of narcissistic people is clearly not the reality. For example, just like psychopaths in general, they are very adept at feigning the empathy they lack when it serves them.

Incidentally NPDs hardly ever get officially diagnosed as such, willingly anyway, because it's not something they usually suffer from; more like something they make others suffer because of.

Let's look at the DMS-IV criterias (the DSM-V are more abstract)

(1) has a grandiose sense of self-importance I find it always amusing how SJWs carry such grotesque causes as manspreading or microaggressions as if they were a modern day Rosa Park or Spartacus. Who else does that?
(2) is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love, (3) believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions) and (4) requires excessive admiration. This fits perfectly with the description of social dominants by Altemeyer.
(5) has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations, (6) is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends The appropriation of the suffering of others towards obtaining social dominance is extremely typical of SJWs. Consider Ivy league-educated executive Pao whining about being subjected to alleged misogynystic banter ... in a fucking private jet. Yeah, women are often mistreated and exploited and victimized. Claiming the victim status of those who are when you yourself aren't is typically narcissistic.
(8) is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her and (9) shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes -- gamergaters are virgin neckbeard rapists who can't get laid and are jealous proud womyn are stealing their hobby, or so I've heard.

[–]nancyfuqindrew 12ポイント13ポイント14ポイント 4時間前 (2子コメント)

[+]niczar スコアが基準値未満のコメント-13ポイント-12ポイント-11ポイント 4時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]jebuswashere 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 28分前 (0子コメント)

[–]deviden 13ポイント14ポイント15ポイント 5時間前 (7子コメント)

[+]niczar スコアが基準値未満のコメント-14ポイント-13ポイント-12ポイント 5時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]deviden 16ポイント17ポイント18ポイント 5時間前 (5子コメント)

[+]niczar スコアが基準値未満のコメント-14ポイント-13ポイント-12ポイント 5時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]deviden 16ポイント17ポイント18ポイント 4時間前 (2子コメント)

And the only responses I'm getting are not showing how what I'm saying is wrong, but how I, as a person, am stupid or ignorant or deluded or whatever.

You have made an extraordinary hypothesis for which you provide no evidence, just your assertion. When challenged for evidence you say "nuh uh, I'm just a guy on the internet, don't need no evidence".

Without evidence your claim can be disregarded entirely.

Your inability to understand the requirement for positing evidence for an extraordinary hypothesis is evidence for your incompetence.

I'm not making any claims as to my skill levels. I never said I was better than you or anyone at psychiatric diagnoses, nor even good at it.

You said:

Well I have an answer. It turns out, they're the same kind of people who make false rape accusations. Cluster B types, specifically NPD (mainly), ASPD, HPD and to a lesser extent BPD (for the false accusation part). Turns out most SJWs are NPD/HPD.

You made a diagnosis of psychological disorder; the diagnosis is spurious, without evidence and applied to a ludicrously broad swathe of people on the basis of you having read the word "projection" in a wikipedia article then hearing someone else say "SJWs project..." etc. You therefore, on the basis of your total absence of skill/competence in the area of psychological disorder diagnosis, believe yourself to be capable of making such a diagnosis.

[+]niczar スコアが基準値未満のコメント-11ポイント-10ポイント-9ポイント 4時間前 (1子コメント)

You have made an extraordinary hypothesis for which you provide no evidence, just your assertion. When challenged for evidence you say "nuh uh, I'm just a guy on the internet, don't need no evidence".

No, that's not what I said. I posted an hypothesis. You criticized me for not upholding some arbitrary standard. I'm saying I don't have to abide by this standard because my claims do not require it.

You made a diagnosis of psychological disorder

I did not make a diagnosis, because a diagnosis applies to one person. It's also always provisional. Newly discovered facts, circumstances, test results, response to treatment further inform or infirm it.

And yes, I made those assertions in a rather peremptory tone, because again I'm not writing a scientific paper and I don't feel like prefacing every sentence with disclaimers, qualifiers and weasel words. Reasonable people understand that for what it is, because reasonable people have a notion of context.

For some reason I'm not entirely clear about, SJWs tend to ignore context.

[–]deviden 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

No, that's not what I said.

Yes it is. You said:

It's something I would be expected to do if I was writing a paper to be published. Out of curiosity, why do YOU demand it of me when I'm just commenting on reddit? Where's this entitlement coming from?

= "nuh uh, I'm just a guy on the internet, don't need no evidence"

I posted an hypothesis. You criticized me for not upholding some arbitrary standard. I'm saying I don't have to abide by this standard because my claims do not require it.

And yes, I made those assertions in a rather peremptory tone, because again I'm not writing a scientific paper and I don't feel like prefacing every sentence with disclaimers, qualifiers and weasel words. Reasonable people understand that for what it is, because reasonable people have a notion of context.

I'm genuinely laughing behind my desk at the absurdity of this.

So you're saying that just because you happen to believe in a hypothesis that we must respect your hypothesis and that such a hypothesis requires no evidence because you aren't a scientist?

Sorry kid, your hypothesis requires evidence or else it is trash. There's no exceptions. An extraordinary hypothesis requires evidence or it can be disregarded. You have no evidence therefore your trash opinion is disregarded.

It's also always provisional. Newly discovered facts, circumstances, test results, response to treatment further inform or infirm it.

This gets better and better. I thought you weren't going to use "weasel words"? Why are you trying to weasel out of being asked to apply rigour to your opinions?

[–]mrsamsa 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]friendly-dropbear 16ポイント17ポイント18ポイント 9時間前 (1子コメント)

[+]niczar スコアが基準値未満のコメント-25ポイント-24ポイント-23ポイント 9時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]pezz29 14ポイント15ポイント16ポイント 7時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]PrettyIceCubeSex atheism > Gender athesim 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Atropa_belladonadoesn't play hardcore FPS because ovulation 11ポイント12ポイント13ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

π Rendered by PID 10030 on app-123 at 2015-06-29 16:11:57.720643+00:00 running b31b74f country code: JP.

BadSocialScience

調停者