How to detect a sociopath.

[Ecmandu]

@Magnus Anderson

@Ecmandu

Good is easy to define. It’s when all beings in existence get everything they want forever at the expense of no other being.

That’s a GOOD day.

Cool, that’s your definition. But how do you know that’s also how other people define that word? In fact, I’d say that noone does. You’re pretty much alone in this regard.

When someone says “It’s a good day today” they are generally saying that the day is better than some other day they have in mind. They are not necessarily saying that everyone got everything they wanted on that day. In fact, noone ever means that (except for you.)

That’s because I’m not on the spectrum.

You sound like a Christian apologist here.

Non sociopaths don’t think in terms of feeling what others don’t. That’s why they’re called empaths.

They feel what others feel.

If someone even bothers asking me how my day went, I already know they’re on the spectrum.

Like I said, Sociopaths tip their hands with their language, and speech is also a form of behavior.

To a non sociopath, the actual answer is so redundant that there’s no point to ask the question, “how’s your day been?”

I’ll grant that some days are better for all beings than others…

So you could say something like, “somewhat decent”

“Somewhat less decent”

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

@Ecmandu

@Magnus Anderson

@Ecmandu

Good is easy to define. It’s when all beings in existence get everything they want forever at the expense of no other being.

That’s a GOOD day.

Cool, that’s your definition. But how do you know that’s also how other people define that word? In fact, I’d say that noone does. You’re pretty much alone in this regard.

When someone says “It’s a good day today” they are generally saying that the day is better than some other day they have in mind. They are not necessarily saying that everyone got everything they wanted on that day. In fact, noone ever means that (except for you.)

That’s because I’m not on the spectrum.

You sound like a Christian apologist here.

Non sociopaths don’t think in terms of feeling what others don’t. That’s why they’re called empaths.

They feel what others feel.

If someone even bothers asking me how my day went, I already know they’re on the spectrum.

Like I said, Sociopaths tip their hands with their language, and speech is also a form of behavior.

To a non sociopath, the actual answer is so redundant that there’s no point to ask the question, “how’s your day been?”

I’ll grant that some days are better for all beings than others…

So you could say something like, “somewhat decent”

“Somewhat less decent”

Sounds like a photo finish, hard to say, but Pasqual may have had a slight contentious edge by reason of what a good day should contain, rather than it has sorrily been neglectfully devolved to a Darwinesque.
May be it is more a matter of a memetic overcoming-compensation for genetic decline
The viruses are exemplary in violating human existence? they are living organisms as well, the have meta intelligences with which they can show their kind of superiority in the grand scheme of things.

Their intelligence is cross wired, robotically controlled , but the good side is that maybe they invaded higher function as a warning to MAN as to what a future perfect world may lead to the opposite; the destruction of humanness? Of humane-ness; whereby after , no show of hands can tip off any one capable of decontroling things; political or psychological and putting things back as they were

That unfounded good, to perpetuate what Man means, should be like the light which enlightens him to his true trajectory of trying to replenish the treasure box of what he should consist of, without violating that universally rich treasure trove that can assure an unhindered , unviolated existence that was once his, but then fell from grace .

Photo finishes are not perfect either, but at least none can tip off a wager because of a casual show if a hand.

[Magnus_Anderson]

@Ecmandu

That’s because I’m not on the spectrum.

You’re missing the point.

Your argument is that people who say “It’s a good day today” even though there are kittens elsewhere suffering are irrational because they don’t acknowledge that existence isn’t good.

I asked you to clarify what you mean by “Existence is good”. And you did. You said that it refers to a kind of existence where everyone is getting everything they want at noone’s expense.

Thus, your argument is that these “It’s a good day today” people are irrational because they think that everyone is getting everything they want at noone’s expense.

My question to you was: where did you get the idea that they think that everyone is getting everything they want at nonoe’s expense? Statements such as “It’s a good day day” do not imply it because people who use them generally don’t define words the way you do.

Sounds like a photo finish, hard to say, but Pasqual may have had a slight contentious edge by reason of what a good day should contain, rather than it has sorority been neglectful devolved to a Darwinesque.

Stop quoting unnecessarily.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

Magnus Anderson says:

“Stop quoting unnecessarily.”

Meno says:

“That was not a quote, but a necessary filler; to avoid holes in the argument”

)

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

Magnus Anderson says:

“Stop quoting unnecessarily.”

Meno says:

“That was not a quote, but a necessary filler; to avoid holes in the argument”

Sorry for the double take.
)

[Ecmandu]

Magnus.

I was a sociopath (although most people would laugh at my ’trangressions’.). I’ve also been to some extremely harsh real spiritual hell realms. I speak from that perspective. Being sent to hell realms for no reason.

So… consent violation means more to me than the average human. And this is where it gets complicated.

Do you think everyone who exists should be sent to harsh hell realms until they agree that consent violation is the meta problem in existence?

The problem here is luxury. You have the luxury to disagree with me.

Should you see the kinds of things I’ve seen… it’s no longer a luxury, like a flat earther in space. No longer have that luxury.

I have no interest in sending you to harsh hell realms.

Stuff way beyond your comprehension.

But I do want you to know that your debate is a luxury.

[Magnus_Anderson]

You’re violating my consent. I asked a question, and instead of either answering that question or ignoring it, you took the opportunity to talk about things I have no interest in. I did not consent to you talking about you being sent to hell. I don’t care. And it’s ironic considering you’re a self-proclaimed empath. Aren’t you supposed to know and respect what kind of response I want to hear from you and what kind I don’t?

[Ecmandu]

@Magnus Anderson

You’re violating my consent. I asked a question, and instead of either answering that question or ignoring it, you took the opportunity to talk about things I have no interest in. I did not consent to you talking about you being sent to hell. I don’t care. And it’s ironic considering you’re a self-proclaimed empath. Aren’t you supposed to know and respect what kind of response I want to hear from you and what kind I don’t?

I answered your question very well.

It’s a luxury that you can afford to disagree with consent violation being the meta problem of all existence.

As for me pointing out that consent violation being the meta problem of all existence violating YOUR consent?

Thats sociopathy or psychopathy by definition.

It’s like a serial rapist being sent to prison and saying that you’re violating their consent.

There is an exception to the consent violation law…

You can always speak out and do something about abuse.

Disempower and debate.

The serial rapist in prison is disempowered. Now. Debate them.

[Ecmandu]

@Ecmandu

@Magnus Anderson

You’re violating my consent. I asked a question, and instead of either answering that question or ignoring it, you took the opportunity to talk about things I have no interest in. I did not consent to you talking about you being sent to hell. I don’t care. And it’s ironic considering you’re a self-proclaimed empath. Aren’t you supposed to know and respect what kind of response I want to hear from you and what kind I don’t?

I answered your question very well.

It’s a luxury that you can afford to disagree with consent violation being the meta problem of all existence.

As for me pointing out that consent violation being the meta problem of all existence violating YOUR consent?

Thats sociopathy or psychopathy by definition.

It’s like a serial rapist being sent to prison and saying that you’re violating their consent.

There is an exception to the consent violation law…

You can always speak out and do something about abuse.

Disempower and debate.

The serial rapist in prison is disempowered. Now. Debate them.

Now back to what you wanted me to speak to…

After giving you a foundation.

Given what I just stated. When someone asks you how your day is going…

Why would you ever say, “good”?

[Magnus_Anderson]

@Ecmandu

I answered your question very well.

Did you?

This is what I asked:

@Magnus

My question to you was: where did you get the idea that they think that everyone is getting everything they want at nonoe’s expense?

Where’s your answer?

@Ecmandu

As for me pointing out that consent violation being the meta problem of all existence violating YOUR consent?

Thats sociopathy or psychopathy by definition.

It’s like a serial rapist being sent to prison and saying that you’re violating their consent.

There is an exception to the consent violation law…

You can always speak out and do something about abuse.

But I’m not a serial rapist, I did not rape you, I did not abuse you and I did not otherwise violate your consent.

[Ecmandu]

@Magnus Anderson

@Ecmandu

I answered your question very well.

Did you?

This is what I asked:

@Magnus

My question to you was: where did you get the idea that they think that everyone is getting everything they want at nonoe’s expense?

Where’s your answer?

@Ecmandu

As for me pointing out that consent violation being the meta problem of all existence violating YOUR consent?

Thats sociopathy or psychopathy by definition.

It’s like a serial rapist being sent to prison and saying that you’re violating their consent.

There is an exception to the consent violation law…

You can always speak out and do something about abuse.

But I’m not a serial rapist, I did not rape you, I did not abuse you and I did not otherwise violate your consent.

You are violating my consent by disagreeing that consent violation is the only and meta problem for all beings in existence.

Your first post has nothing to do with what I stated.

This is about honesty here. If people are honest, everyone is having their consent violated in some way shape or form.

That’s a shitshow.

My question to you again. “Why under any circumstance in that environment would ANYONE say it’s a good day, or that they’re doing fine?

Think about it. For some bizarre reason, real is raising the bar on people.

I know why.

It destroys all philosophy that came before, it destroys all heroes, it destroys the narrative, it destroys all religion.

But it’s also objective … so it even destroys the coping mechanism of moral nihilism.

I just pulled the carpet from under these facades.

Are you honestly going to stand here and tell me that consent violation is not THEE meta problem for all beings?

[Magnus_Anderson]

So you are refusing to answer my question?

[Ecmandu]

@Magnus Anderson

So you are refusing to answer my question?

Your question is not anything I stated. You’re being absurd…

Here’s your question:

“My question to you was: where did you get the idea that they get everything they want at nobodies expense?”

I never said that. You said that. Everyone in existence knows that in some way shape or form everyone (including themselves) is having their consent violated.

I ignored the way you put words that I never spoke or believe or can be inferred from what I say or said.

You’re being absurd here.

[Magnus_Anderson]

Where did I make a mistake?

@Magnus

Your argument is that people who say “It’s a good day today” even though there are kittens elsewhere suffering are irrational because they don’t acknowledge that existence isn’t good.

I asked you to clarify what you mean by “Existence is good”. And you did. You said that it refers to a kind of existence where everyone is getting everything they want at noone’s expense.

Thus, your argument is that these “It’s a good day today” people are irrational because they think that everyone is getting everything they want at noone’s expense.

My question to you was: where did you get the idea that they think that everyone is getting everything they want at nonoe’s expense? Statements such as “It’s a good day day” do not imply it because people who use them generally don’t define words the way you do.

[Ecmandu]

@Magnus Anderson

Where did I make a mistake?

@Magnus

Your argument is that people who say “It’s a good day today” even though there are kittens elsewhere suffering are irrational because they don’t acknowledge that existence isn’t good.

I asked you to clarify what you mean by “Existence is good”. And you did. You said that it refers to a kind of existence where everyone is getting everything they want at noone’s expense.

Thus, your argument is that these “It’s a good day today” people are irrational because they think that everyone is getting everything they want at noone’s expense.

My question to you was: where did you get the idea that they think that everyone is getting everything they want at nonoe’s expense? Statements such as “It’s a good day day” do not imply it because people who use them generally don’t define words the way you do.

No. The whole defining something like sociopathy as irrationality is your part… a straw man of sorts.

Sociopaths don’t have the emotional capacity to understand as much as empaths do.

A lack of capacity is not the definition for irrationality.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

Note:

It’s so easy to get bogged down in the kind of definitions that could ignite widening a dogmatic rhetoric which devalue the idea of a much more anti deritive/ deontological sensibility that positivists the world over have been clamoring for since the Great world wars.

Sorry, had to find a erasing necerry to include .
Someone has to place the generally defined public good over it’s now defunt antithesid

[Ecmandu]

@Ecmandu

@Magnus Anderson

Where did I make a mistake?

@Magnus

Your argument is that people who say “It’s a good day today” even though there are kittens elsewhere suffering are irrational because they don’t acknowledge that existence isn’t good.

I asked you to clarify what you mean by “Existence is good”. And you did. You said that it refers to a kind of existence where everyone is getting everything they want at noone’s expense.

Thus, your argument is that these “It’s a good day today” people are irrational because they think that everyone is getting everything they want at noone’s expense.

My question to you was: where did you get the idea that they think that everyone is getting everything they want at nonoe’s expense? Statements such as “It’s a good day day” do not imply it because people who use them generally don’t define words the way you do.

No. The whole defining something like sociopathy as irrationality is your part… a straw man of sorts.

Sociopaths don’t have the emotional capacity to understand as much as empaths do.

A lack of capacity is not the definition for irrationality.

Let me explain this further.

A person who is quadriplegic is not irrational for not being able to walk.

The issue when it comes to emotional intelligence or brain illness is that the very illness has a personal stigma that’s not associated with what we consider ‘physical’ handicaps. People get really defensive about mental and emotional handicaps.

This gets into dangerous territory of being told “your feelings aren’t right so just obey me”

We need to have honest discussions about this stuff.

[Sculptor]

@Meno_

Note:

It’s so easy to get bogged down in the kind of definitions that could ignite widening a dogmatic rhetoric which devalue the idea of a much more anti deritive/ deontological sensibility that positivists the world over have been clamoring for since the Great world wars.

NO they have not!
Your comment is meaningless.

Sorry, had to find a erasing necerry to include .
Someone has to place the generally defined public good over it’s now defunt antithesid

[Ecmandu]

I edited my last post sculptor.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

@Sculptor

@Meno_

Note:

It’s so easy to get bogged down in the kind of definitions that could ignite widening a dogmatic rhetoric which devalue the idea of a much more anti deritive/ deontological sensibility that positivists the world over have been clamoring for since the Great world wars.

NO they have not!
Your comment is meaningless.

Sorry, had to find a erasing necerry to include .
Someone has to place the generally defined public good over it’s now defunt antithesid

As is your response .