Hahahaha what’s a secondary psychopath?
Someone who was born “normal”, but was raised by a psychopath or something similar, maybe an NPD.
Like a learned psychopathy type thing?
Yes, it’s more or less inevitable when raised by such beings, it’s not true psychopathy but more like learned partial psychopathy
Can I ask what are its characteristics?
By the way, it’s probably because my eyes are not smiling. It was meant as a joke.
But maybe not, who knows, maybe it’s a pictoral Freudian slip.
Don’t have enough personal experience with this one so you’ll have to google it
Meh.
But so you didn’t have some in mind when you pointed it out? What made you think of that diagnosis then?
I’ve seen this half-insane facial expression a few times and imo it doesn’t belong to any major diagnosis. It looks like a mixture of normal and psychopatic functioning. You’ll also see it on some Muslims since Islam is quite psychopathic.
Hahahahahaha fine I guess I’ll take that.
By the way, what makes a face insane is a forced expression, a contrived shape divorced from an actual emotion. The intentionality makes it feel somewhat psychopathic.
Though I suppose I have seen more of man’s dangerous side than most, at least most here.
Back to psychoanalysis:
What greenfuse probably meant by calling me wierdly creepy and personal is that I am listening as much, if not more, for what the subconscious wants to communicate as what is actually being intended. I barely even see a distinction anymore. Anybody who goes fishing for the exact line can only find that there isn’t one. 90% of the time people only feel they have a clear, conscious intent. It’s a feeling, it most times does not even tie to an actual egoic intent. This explains the poor and half assed nature of most thoughts. They are assembled by the subconscious and excreted with the barest excuse of egoic coherence.
That’s also why I feel I am perfectly, even unusually direct and straightforward, but I come off as speaking evasively and in riddles. In my conscious awareness, the subconscious is an obvious and integral part of any communication. It frankly shocks me that this is not true for everybody’s conscious awareness. I attribute it to some humanity-wide trauma, that closes that door and maintains an artificial understanding of emotional human reality.
I mean, of course, if 90% of the psyche is subconscious, it basically follows that 90% of communication will be, as well.
This is the curse of “enlightenment” rationalism. The actual belief that everything is as printed.
There is only one person I’ve met who actually approaches this. God bless her million dollar soul.
Well I guess in general women are more naturally like this. More aware of this reality.
Part of me suspects that the “mindlesness” Atlas thinks he saw was just a normal woman’s eyes, that inhabits a place of acceptance of the obviousness of the subconscious that would seem like a just black wall to a person who is simply unknowingly led by it.
Also why women are more naturally and reflexively judgemental. Go on and try to bullshit a person constantly in tune with subconscious intent.
Anyway, thanks again.
All life experiences trauma.
It’s how it reacts to what is done to it, that distinguishes its endurance…its inherited constitutions.
That’s true.
But, if it is sexual childhood trauma at the hands of an adult, for example, this reaction will be subconscious and pathological.
Some become autistic, some psychopathic, etc. Nobody gets off scott free from abuse. If you think about it, it would be kind of horrific if they did.
Women consider a man’s propensity for overt force a product of an inferior understanding of his nature; her covert brutality rising to unimaginable, by males, levels of psychological cruelty.
A female bites, screams, and protests under a male’s mass, denying, rejecting and mocking. Then, seeded and content, she carries the man with her; his scent, his essence, his vitality, his words.
She gestates and gives birth to his progeny; repeating his words, becoming a prism through which his light shines, splintering into a million different hues. He lives within and without her; his essence reflected on her every surface; he is everywhere and nowhere – through her he has passed himself on.
And how much of what your unconscious 90% finds is what it wants to find rather than clearly seeing the other person’s unconscious, online no less. You’re not our psychoanalyst but it is as if you’ve taken on that role, to a degree. That’s the creepy part. Where someone else might get angry, you give a ‘psychoanalytic help’ comment instead. Or is it anger masked as help? Or is it dominance? I can read you. I have no idea.
What would a good psychoanalyst say about you taking on that role in a philosophy forum online?
And I’m not looking to hear that answer. I’m suggesting it might be something to mull.