Tagged: manipulation Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • James 12:25 on October 31, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , if you read this tag type 'banana' in the comments, manipulation, , , ,   

    Holding back the tide. 

    A reader asked:

    “Do you think a psychopath could see the benefit of utilizing cognitive empathy……since we all live in this planet? Our governments and corporations are run by psychopaths and the abuse is rampant and detrimental to the species since trauma shrinks the brain and in all honesty those who lack empathy are a special kind of stupid. Why can they not see that it is to their advantage to give a shit about others even if it’s for the selfish reason of reducing the bullshit they get from people in the long term. Plus it would increase the average IQ and improve everyone’s living conditions. Why wouldn’t a psychopath want that? Can’t you learn to use your abilities for good?”

    Thanks, ‘bunny foo foo’ (http://en.gravatar.com/hsousse), you’re right. Some of us are intelligent enough to realise this, and modify our behaviour accordingly.

    However, sometimes old habits die hard, and we are only human. I have recently done some stuff which definitely wasn’t part of the plan to “be good” and in the longer run has proved destructive for myself as well as others; at the time, though, it was just fun to let loose and cause a bit of destruction. Yes, fun.

    What you have to understand is the majority of psychopaths have, to a greater or lesser degree, a sadistic streak, and all crave regular stimulation and excitement. So, unfortunately, conflict is inevitable, even with psychopaths who have a desire to be more conscientious.

    I’m not saying it’s not my fault. I still have a free will and the ability to make rational decisions, but when making decisions that are in the interests of everyone, I am fighting against my instincts and genetic programming.

    If you want to understand what that’s like, try to imagine yourself doing something which you think immoral, say kicking a puppy while wearing heavy boots, or deliberately saying something to make your mother cry. If you have any sort of imagination, you can probably feel some sort of discomfort just at the thought, as though your body and mind are already resisting the actions which don’t come naturally to you. It’s difficult attempting to be something you’re not, even for a while.

    None of this is an attempt to excuse past or present misdeeds, this is just a way of improving understanding, and breaking the empathy barrier that exists between you, dear reader, and me.

    Perhaps you can recall a time when you tried to act in a way contrary to your nature, and found it more difficult than you thought. If you ever have, let us know in the comments. We might find common ground on which cognitive empathy can grow and flourish.

    Advertisements
     
    • Amaterasu Solar 11:17 on November 4, 2017 Permalink | Reply

      Sorry it took so long to get to reading this – life has a penchant, it seems, for getting in the way. LOL! I do admire You, James, for Your awareness, if not for choices of a psychopathic nature You make.

      I can honestly say that I have never chosen to do anything that was not of My nature – but I can envision it well – the idea of kicking an innocent creature hurt My heart, and I don’t know what I might say to make anOther cry… I cannot imaging WHY I would want to, and motivation would be the birth of ideas on things to say.

      Still, (ironically) I can empathize with Your dilemma. Being sadistic at times and having to choose between that and something that would keep seas calm would add conflict within.

      Like

    • bunny foo foo 07:10 on November 6, 2017 Permalink | Reply

      Thank you for writing this. I am trying to figure out what exactly I am. I think I am something like “Dexter”. I didn’t start out as a sociopath but due to extreme trauma and repeated abuse I sorta became one and as I was growing up I realized what I was becoming and would think about my funeral and how people would respond to my death ( I was 10 at the time ). I didn’t want to become a serial killer it seemed kinda lonely and not what I wanted. So I set about redesigning my personality and character. Later, as the years passed I had learned to practice cognitive empathy on a daily basis almost as a religion. After 23 years of trying to undo the damage that was done to me and return to my original self I finally felt authentic empathy. I began to see the world differently and my relationships improved. I began to see abuse towards others whether by me or someone else or even an apath condoning the abuse as abuse against me. I started to understand our interconnectedness more clearly. I eventually became an empath as I was likely always one but the trauma had rewired my brain towards sociopathic tendencies. Yes I used to do cruel things and had difficulty relating to people’s emotional world due to emotional numbing……..not a problem now. The problem with being an empath is that they are often targets to psychopaths, typically because in an unhealthy state they are codependent (covert narcissism) but as I became emotionally healthier I become more of a realist and had to make a conscious decision to raise my level of narcissism in order to protect myself but only to a point where is was for self protection and not to a level of becoming the thing I had come to despise ( an abuser ). Now after vacillating between the two extremes I find myself somewhere where I would imagine law enforcement often falls. I want to hunt the bad guys (abusers) and end them. Granted people in law enforcement and setting governmental policies for the supposed betterment of society are often psychopaths and narcissist themselves I am not quite like them either. I don’t want to abuse the abuser nor do I find enjoyment at the thought of killing them off. I really just want to sterilize them and lock them away and treat them kindly if they earn it if they don’t earn it then solitary. If no hope of them to be nothing but a detriment to their own species then regretfully yes kill them. I’m thinking of the most violent and destructive the rest would be interesting to study and perhaps rehabilitate. Humanity is a really dumb monkey species and they will be the cause of their own extinction……if we don’t rein in the destructive members and evolve bringing empaths in charge then we are doomed to extinction. What is the psychopath’s place in our social ecosystem…….what is their purpose but to be a parasitic virus that needs excising. So while I’m not sure what to call what I am as I’m more of a hybrid, people like me are probably like society’s immune system and not a detriment.

      Like

      • James 13:11 on November 6, 2017 Permalink | Reply

        People like you should terrify society. Your final solution “for the greater good” has been tried before by others like you who were convinced they were right. Thank G-d you are not in power.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Amaterasu Solar 11:14 on November 7, 2017 Permalink | Reply

          My solution has everything to do with removing the tools to power over Others. We just now have the technology to do that, historically speaking. One of the key technologies is hidden and suppressed, but I personally know it’s there…

          Anyway, if the tools to power over Others are removed, though We cannot solve for Individuals choosing unEthical behaviors, We are then dealing with Individuals who have to do Their dirty work personally, as opposed to being able to pay Others in huge numbers to do it.

          I do not advocate any “precrime” – like genetic discrimination – and only advocate for the Ethical solving of any problem any Individual chooses to create.

          I will be posting My latest video to the end of solving for the psychopaths in control on Our planet shortly.

          Like

          • James 07:14 on November 8, 2017 Permalink | Reply

            Deleted this nazi shite from our rabbit friend. Yes, there is no freedom of speech on my blog posts. Sue me.

            Like

            • Amaterasu Solar 15:49 on November 8, 2017 Permalink | Reply

              NAZI??? Me? The Nazis want to be in control of the planet. What I propose is Individuals in control of Self, within three Laws of Ethics. But thanks for the delete, dear One. I’m sure the psychopaths in control are happy that You deleted it. LOLOL!

              Like

              • James 13:26 on November 9, 2017 Permalink | Reply

                Not you, the comment you replied to, from Bunny Foo Foo. But yours got deleted as well, because it was a reply.

                Liked by 1 person

          • James 07:15 on November 8, 2017 Permalink | Reply

            Amy: leaving a whole week between posts is perfect. Thanks for addressing my earlier concerns.

            Like

  • GeneticPsychosMom (Tina) 09:26 on October 20, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , dark triad, ego, , , manipulation, , , , ,   

    A Narcissist, a Psychopath, and a Machiavellian Walk into a Bar… 

    The bartender asks, ‘who has the darkest personality out of you three?’ The Narcissist says ‘me’, the Psychopath says, ‘I don’t care’ and the Mach says ‘it’s whoever I want it to be’.

    All embarrassing jokes aside, the Dark Triad of Personality rather ominously named, is an area of Psychological research which is attracting significant attention. It is however only a young field, in fact, it was just over a decade ago that Paulhus and Williams (2002) coined the term ‘Dark Triad’. It’s an area of research that seems to intrigue Organisational, Clinical and Forensic Psychologists alike and of course, has important implications for society as a whole. However, is there any real merit, use and/or empirical rigour in the study of these traits? I was inspired to delve a little deeper into the Dark Triad after last month’s blog on office politics, which touched on certain characteristics which fall within the remit of these traits i.e. manipulating others for self gain.

    So what does the Dark Triad consist of?

    Narcissism: characterised by grandiosity, entitlement, dominance, and superiority (Corry, Merritt, Mrug, & Pamp, 2008). The scale largely used to measure this trait is the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI; Raskin & Hall, 1979).

    Psychopathy: characterised by high levels of impulsivity and thrill-seeking along with low levels of empathy (Hare, 1985). It has been described as the most ‘malevolent’ of the Dark Triad (Rauthmann, 2012). The scale which is largely used in the literature to measure Psychopathy is the Self-Report Psychopathy (SRP) scale, version III forthcoming (Paulhus, Neumann, & Hare). It was modelled on the Psychopathy Check List (Hare, 1991), which is largely seen as the ‘‘gold standard’’ for the measurement of forensic Psychopathy.

    Machiavellianism: characterised as being cynical, unprincipled and using manipulation of others for self-gain and life success (Jones & Palhaus, 2009). The scale which is most used to measure this construct is the Mach IV (Christie & Geis, 1970).

    Global measures of the triad have recently been created such as the Dirty Dozen, a 12 item scale (Jonason & Webster, 2010) and the Short Dark Triad, a 27 item scale (SD3; Jones & Paulhus, forthcoming).

    Both Narcissism and Psychopathy have migrated from the clinical literature as personality disorders found in DSM-IV, whilst Machiavellianism has been distilled from the philosophy and tactics of Nicolo Machiavelli. In this instance, they have been applied to the sub-clinical population in much the same way as the Big Five personality factors. It is suggested that there are extreme personalities in our communities, which cross the boundary over into subclinical Dark Triad territory. In fact, a recent TED talk* highlighted the fact that as many as 1% of ‘normal people’ could be classed as a Psychopath, rising to 4% in CEO’s and business leaders.

    Much of my research into the Dark Triad was precipitated by an excellent new review of the literature by Furnham, Richards & Paulhus (2013). Hence please refer to this for a more detailed account of this area. They do a particularly good job at highlighting the major outcomes which the Dark Triad predict, across the workplace, educational and evolutionary literature.

    Focussing on workplace behaviours, they cite research which shows that while leaders who are high in such traits can be successful in navigating their way to the top (when coupled with high IQ and attractiveness, apparently), most eventually fall or derail in the end (Furnham, 2010). They are described by Hogan (2007) as being able to ‘get ahead’ but not ‘get along’ – which eventually comes back to haunt them. Specific behaviours include Narcissists’ softer methods of manipulation, while Psychopaths use harder, more direct methods and Machs are able to be flexible and switch between both methods (Jonason, Slomski, & Partyka, 2012). With extremely successful publications such as Snakes in Suits raising awareness of Dark Triad traits and behaviours, leadership derailment and management style are more relevant and important than ever.

    In terms of specifics, research indicates that Psychopaths tend to make negative impressions in short meetings (Rauthman, 2012), while Machs have the most questionable morals and are most cynical towards others (Rauthman, 2012). Lastly, Narcissists believe themselves to be good leaders, with high emotional intelligence even though they are perceived negatively by those around them (Petrides et al, 2011). Globally, however, all three Dark Triad traits exhibit a drive for ruthless self-advancement (Zuroff, Fournier, Patall, & Leybman, 2010).

    A word of warning; whereas Psychopaths react aggressively to physical threat, Narcissists do so to ego-threat (Jones & Palhaus, 2010). However, Machs are more deliberate and cautious as to how they react and respond as they don’t give into temptation as easily as the other two typically do (Williams, Nathanson & Paulhus, 2010). Therefore, when thinking about corporate crime, Jones et al (2012) suggest that it is the Mach who is unhindered by the impulsivity of the Psychopath, and displays of hedonism of the Narcissist to be the most successful perpetrator of white-collar crimes.

    All jokes aside, the next time you face an aggressive bully, you could be dealing with a Psychopath. The next time you face an overtly arrogant manager, you could be dealing with a Narcissist. And finally, the next time you find yourself manoeuvred out of an opportunity, you may have just been made a victim of a Mach’s manipulation. The Dark Triad does exist, perhaps in all of us. However, in the vast majority of us, they do so to a much lesser extent than that 1% of the population that they truly manifest themselves in.

    Written by Raj Chopra, TPF committee member.

    Follow me on Twitter: @Raj_Chopra24, follow TPF on Twitter: @TPF_UK.

    References

    Christie, R. C., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York: Academic press.

    Corry, N., Merritt, R. D., Mrug, S., & Pamp, B. (2008). The factor structure of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 593–600.

    Furnham, A. (2010). The Elephant in the Boardroom: The Causes of Leadership Derailment. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Furnham, A., Richards, S.C. & Paulhus, D.L. (2013) The Dark Triad of Personality: A 10 Year Review. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7/3, 199–216,

    Hare, R. D. (1985). Comparison of procedures for the assessment of psychopathy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53, 7–16.

    Hare, R. D. (1991). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.

    Hogan, R. (2007). Personality and the Fate of Organizations. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Jonason, P. K., Slomski, S., & Partyka, J. (2012). The Dark Triad at work: How toxic employees get their way. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 449–453.

    Jonason, P. K., & Webster, G. D. (2010). The Dirty Dozen: A concise measure of the Dark Triad. Psychological Assessment, 22, 420–432.

    Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2009). Machiavellianism. In M. R. Leary & R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of Individual Differences in Social Behavior (pp. 93–108). New York: Guilford.

    Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2010). Different provocations trigger aggression in narcissists and psychopaths. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1, 12–18.

    Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. forthcoming. Introducing the Short Dark Triad (SD3): A brief measure of dark personalities. Manuscript under review.

    Paulhus, D. L., Neumann, C. S., & Hare, R. D. forthcoming. Manual for the Self-Report Psychopathy (SRP) Scale. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.

    Paulhus, D. L, & Williams, K. M. (2002). The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 556–563.

    Petrides, K. V., Vernon, P. A., Schermer, J. A., & Veselka, L. (2011). Trait emotional intelligence and the Dark Triad of personality. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 14, 35–41.

    Raskin, R. N., & Hall, C. S. (1979). Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Psychological Reports, 45, 590.

    Rauthmann, J. F. (2012). The Dark Triad and interpersonal perception: Similarities and differences in the social consequences of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 487–496.

    Williams, K. M., Nathanson, C., & Paulhus, D. L. (2010). Identifying and profiling scholastic cheaters: Their personality, cognitive ability, and motivation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 16, 293–307.

    Zuroff, D. C., Fournier, M. A., Patall, E. A., & Leybman, M. J. (2010). Steps toward an evolutionary personality psychology: Individual differences in the social rank domain. Canadian Psychology, 51, 58–66.

    Reblogged from: A Narcissist, a Psychopath and a Machiavellian Walk into a Bar…  by Raj Chopra, June 23, 2013

     

    Psychopath TEST Politicians

     

    .

     
    • nowve666 09:47 on October 20, 2017 Permalink | Reply

      I think Machiavellianism is a strategy, not a personality characteristic in itself as if Narcissism and Psychopathy. Both Narcs and ‘Paths can be Machiavellian to achieve their ends. An NT can also use Machiavellian tactics at times. But it’s a technique, not a personality “disorder.” Therefore, I don’t think “the dark triad” should be treated as a “thing.” Three people might have walked into the bar but the third one can be a Narc or a ‘Path or an NT.

      Liked by 1 person

  • GeneticPsychosMom (Tina) 09:38 on April 10, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , manipulation, , , , , , Republicans, ,   

    Dear Kentucky, Mitch McConnell Might Be a Psychopath 

    Mitch McConnell Contradiction in facial expression - a smile with a frown - smirk and dead eyes

    Contradiction in facial expression – a smile with a frown – smirk and dead eyes

    McConnell: ‘Winners make policy, losers go home” and more quotes on “Stuff Psychopaths Say.”

    “No majority leader wants written on his tombstone that he presided over the end of the Senate,” the minority leader said.

    He continued: “Breaking the rules to change the rules is un-American. I just hope the majority leader thinks about his legacy, the future of his party, and, most importantly, the future of our country before he acts.”

    Are these the words of Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) as the Republican majority changed Senate rules this week to do away with filibusters of Supreme Court nominations?

    Actually, they were uttered in 2013, by then-Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), when Democrats pushed through a similar filibuster change for lesser nominations.

    That McConnell did a 180 on the topic — going from the institutional defender of the filibuster to the man who destroyed it — is unsurprising. He has frequently shifted his views to suit the needs of the moment. But in this case McConnell was correct in 2013, and what he just did this week was even more ruinous than what he accused the Democrats of doing then.

    By rights, McConnell’s tombstone should say that he presided over the end of the Senate. And I’d add a second line: “He broke America.” No man has done more in recent years to undermine the functioning of U.S. government. His has been the epitome of unprincipled leadership, the triumph of tactics in service of short-term power.

    After McConnell justified his filibuster-ending “nuclear option” by saying it would be beneficial for the Senate, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said this: “Whoever says that is a stupid idiot.”

    McConnell is no idiot. He is a clever man who does what works for him in the moment, consequences be damned.

    Back in 1994, McConnell lamented to the conservative Heritage Foundation that Republicans hadn’t used the filibuster enough: “I am a proud guardian of gridlock. I think gridlock is making a big comeback in the country.”

    For the next quarter-century, he made sure of it. Back then he was fighting all attempts at campaign-finance reform and spending limits, championing disclosure of contributions as the antidote. But when the Supreme Court allowed unlimited “dark money” in campaigns without disclosure, McConnell reversed course and has fought all attempts to enact disclosure.

    McConnell famously declared in 2010: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”

    ProPublica’s Alec MacGillis, author of a McConnell biography, “The Cynic,” reports former Republican senator Robert Bennett’s account of what McConnell told fellow Republicans after Obama’s election: “Mitch said, ‘We have a new president with an approval rating in the 70 percent area. We do not take him on frontally. We find issues where we can win, and we begin to take him down, one issue at a time. We create an inventory of losses, so it’s Obama lost on this, Obama lost on that.’ ”

    And that’s what he did. By 2013, for example, 79 of Obama’s nominees had been blocked by filibusters, compared with 68 in the entire previous history of the Republic.

    After Justice Antonin Scalia’s death was confirmed last year, it took McConnell less than an hour to say that the vacancy should be filled by the next president. He called keeping Obama’s nominee off the court “one of my proudest moments.”

    While other Republicans have at times been willing to criticize President Trump’s outrages, McConnell has been conspicuously quiescent. Although his predecessors at least attempted collegiality, McConnell practices no such niceties (recall his “nevertheless, she persisted” silencing of Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren). But most characteristic of McConnell is his tendency to shift his views to suit current exigencies (on the minimum wage, withdrawal from Iraq, earmarks, abortion, labor and civil rights) and his adroitness at gumming up the works: forcing clerks to spend hours reading a bill aloud on the floor; opposing immigration legislation he’d encouraged; asking for a vote on a debt-ceiling proposal and then trying to filibuster it; urging the Obama administration to support a bipartisan debt commission and then voting against it.

    Now comes the filibuster’s demise. In the current cycle of partisan escalation, it’s only a matter of time before the filibuster is abolished for all legislation, killing the tradition of unlimited debate in the Senate dating back to 1789. The Founders did this so minority rights would be respected and consensus could be formed — and McConnell is undoing it.

    Two years ago, when a Democrat was in the White House, McConnell said he would only abolish filibusters of Supreme Court justices if there were 67 votes for such a change. This week, he employed a maneuver to do it with 51 votes. It suited his momentary needs, but the damage will remain long after McConnell’s tombstone is engraved.

    Excerpt from “Mitch McConnell, the man who broke America“, by Dana Milbank, April 7, 2017

    Image courtesy The Conversation US

     

    Even Mr. McConnell’s fellow Republicans say somewhat admiringly that he can be a secretive and coldly calculating tactician with an eye for political openings, someone more consumed by political strategy than ideology or philosophy.

     

    Habits of Highly Psychopathic People Pic

     

    Psychopath TEST Politicians

    .

    .

     
    • nowve666 09:59 on April 10, 2017 Permalink | Reply

      Much as I hate the GOP, I have a grudging respect for them because of their ruthless pursuit of having their way. At the same time, I have a reluctant contempt for weak-kneed Democrats who let them get away with it. Perfect case in point, when the Repugs refused to do their jobs in the process of confirming (or denying) Obama’s Supreme Court appointment. They just don’t give a damn. They’re like Honey Badgers. Everyone shakes his head and says how wrong it was and the GOP just goes ahead and does it anyway. Result? They now have that seat. Too bad the GOP agenda is everything I’m against. I would love to see that ruthlessness used in favor of an agenda I would like.

      As for the nuclear option, I wanted Obama to use it to pass the health care bill. I’m glad someone finally got rid of the filibuster although I don’t like what they did it for. Maybe now, when our idiot country finally wakes up and kicks these fascists out of office and we have a Democratic Congress, they will be able to actually pass legislation.

      Don’t Psychopath test politicians. We need a good progressive psychopath in government to make his ideas actually work.

      Like

    • Amaterasu Solar 15:54 on April 12, 2017 Permalink | Reply

      All high-up politicians are psychopaths. Maybe a few are puppets of psychopaths. Maybe. The psychopaths in control do NOT let Any get high up in politics unless They are on board with the psychopaths’ agenda.

      Like

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
%d bloggers like this: