Where did it go?

A forum about the forums

Moderator: Carleas

Re: Where did it go?

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:54 pm

Personally, I think iambiguous is a psychopath.

There's a saying in psychology, "not every narcissist is a psychopath, but every psychopath is a narcissist"
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7237
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Where did it go?

Postby barbarianhorde » Sat Oct 13, 2018 1:54 pm

Just a question if you know, is Abusive Narcissist Disorder the same as psychopathy?
It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.
~ Владимир Ильич Ульянов Ленин

THE HORNED ONE
User avatar
barbarianhorde
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1223
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:26 pm
Location: under your pillow

Re: Where did it go?

Postby Arcturus Descending » Sat Oct 13, 2018 4:51 pm

barbarianhorde wrote:Just a question if you know, is Abusive Narcissist Disorder the same as psychopathy?



If you mean a mental disorder, perhaps that would depend on someone's own perception.


https://mindcology.com/narcissist/so-wh ... tic-abuse/

I would say so. If it is a diagnosis and it is, I think that psychiatrists and psychologists would think of it as a mental disorder.


Antisocial Personality Disorder
Like individuals with NPD, men and women who are diagnosed with Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD) feel little or no empathy at all towards others. APD is defined by a disregard for morals and other’s rights and feelings. APD individuals lack the ability or will to differentiate between right and wrong. They are impulsive and occasionally violent; like individuals diagnosed with NPD, men and women with NPD believe that they are above the law and other rules/regulation. This often leads to criminal behavior and drug and alcohol abuse.


Comes close to sounding somewhat like a psychopath.

The worst kind of puppeteers. I call them vampires since they like to suck the very life's blood, spiritually and physically (in a sense) out of their victims.
The best thing to do is to RUN FROM THEM, just as fast and as far as one can.
“How can a bird that is born for joy
Sit in a cage and sing?”
― William Blake


“Little Fly
Thy summers play,
My thoughtless hand
Has brush'd away.

Am not I
A fly like thee?
Or art not thou
A man like me?

For I dance
And drink & sing:
Till some blind hand
Shall brush my wing.

If thought is life
And strength & breath:
And the want
Of thought is death;

Then am I
A happy fly,
If I live,
Or if I die”
― William Blake, Songs of Innocence and of Experience


“No bird soars too high if he soars with his own wings.”
― William Blake
User avatar
Arcturus Descending
Consciousness Seeker
 
Posts: 15274
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: A state of unknowing

Re: Where did it go?

Postby iambiguous » Wed Oct 17, 2018 7:03 pm

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
iambiguous wrote:I don't have any problem with that. I merely explore the extent to which it strikes me as a polemical bent [which I often pursue myself] or a hostility based on the assumption that they really do believe that, with respect to the existential juncture revolving around identity, value judgments and political power, my own argument is genuinely worthy of hostility.
Read this a couple of times: IT IS NOT YOUR ARGUMENT THAT IS WORTHY OR NOT OF HOSTILITY, IT IS YOUR BEHAVIOR THAT PISSSES ME OFF.


My behavior here is the same as yours. I create posts. I read and react to the posts of others.

Piling words in a particular order in order to explore the question, "how ought one to live"? More or less existentially.

I'm proposing one possible answer to that question and that revolves around my own rendition of moral nihilism. And this has always basically been what my behavior has been here.

Then you come back with stuff like this:

Karpel Tunnel wrote: I have made that clear time and again. How did I make this clear? By specifically referring to your behavior, in specfic examples, often quoted quite clearly which I then respond to. I do this in sequence in the thread where they happened. As concrete and clear as possible.


Words piled up in a particular order, true, but nowhere near as "concreate and clear" as I make the attempt myself here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382

We just don't approach the question in the same way at all. Or, rather, it seems that way to me.

Indeed, you just give us more of the same:

Karpel Tunnel wrote: It means that you assume people get mad at you because of the philosophical questions you are asking and the philosophical position you present. It seems inconceivable to you that the things you do, here, the way you respond, that is, your behavior here, could be what pisses people off. Even when I specifically mention specific behavior here, you still write, even in this last post, you still assume that it has nothing to do with how you interact with people.

For someone yearning so hard to find out how one ought to live, it is ironic in the extreme that you cannot even conceive of the fact that HOW you interact might affect other people and piss them off.

And so, instead of noticing what I react to, as clearly laid out, you assume, again, we are afraid of your argument or whatever motivations you attribute to us, rather than actually reacting to the way you interact with us.

You keep telling me that I must have a contraption and that's why I don't react to non-ocbjectivism like you do.

You consistantly frame my reactions in objectivist language and viewpoints, as you do in this post.


I become the argument and you commense to huff and to puff to others about the manner in which I insist that arguments of this sort must be taken out into the world of actual conflicting goods construed from the perspective of "I" as an existential contraption.

Karpel Tunnel wrote: For example asking how I know my actions and preferences are more rational than other people's, when I have made it clear I don't think like that. And then when I point this out, you can't just admit you made a mistake lumping a request to me and Phyllo that really only could apply to Phyllo.


Again, you and I and Phyllo and any others interested in these fundamentally important human relationships, need to focus in on a particular context. Note the components of our own moral philosophies as we react to conflicting behaviors that revolve around conflicting goods that revolve around conflicting points of view.

After all, what in particular does it mean here to speak of arguments as being more or less rational? Or more or less virtuous?
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 26942
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Where did it go?

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Oct 18, 2018 1:49 am

iambiguous wrote:After all, what in particular does it mean here to speak of arguments as being more or less rational? Or more or less virtuous?


Alright, debate me then. You're trolling this stuff every second you choose not to debate me in the debate section.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7237
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Previous

Return to Meta



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users