"And it ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. This coolness arises partly from fear of the opponents, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of men, who do not readily believe in new things until they have had a long experience of them. Thus it happens that whenever those who are hostile have the opportunity to attack they do it like partisans, whilst the others defend lukewarmly, in such wise that the prince is endangered along with them."
-- Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli
Hmm...
ReplyDeleteI can't comprehend these dirty rats who are trying to undermine
ReplyDeleteM.E.'s attempt to do something PRODUCTIVE with her time.
What do they expect to gain from thier juvenial behaviour?
M.E. is a wonderful person who only wants to express herself, and
thinks she is performing a helpful service, decrying prejudice.
Whether sociopaths are "evil" depends on the individual person and
is not a universal designation.
I wonder what the "new order of things" is?
ReplyDeleteMelissaR
The psychopath as ordinary, decent citizen. Color me skeptical.
DeleteAnon 6:51,
DeleteI really don't believe most of what people tell me. I've had people tell me they were drug dealers, gang members, etc., and my empathic bullshit-o-meter goes off instantly. If someone I just met told me they were a psychopath or sociopath I wouldn't believe them. I really don't believe most people on this blog are either. Recently I've had some meaningful exchanges with a few who I do believe are, at least believe as much as I can without meeting someone face to face, and I appreciated their input.
Maybe I'm just an overly skeptical empath.
MelissaR
This would classify you as a lukewarm defender.
DeleteSkepticism is necessary and healthy. You question both the old and the new. It is the basis of science. Even the scientific method uses falsifiability - to be eternally skeptical of everything set until it is broken.
The issue is when something is already broken, and its disproven fragments are embraced as fact. Not because it is still fact, but because dogma flatly compels it must be so. In this case, it no longer is about the object of dogma, but the people who worship it.
Oh boy, here we go...
DeleteAre we getting into conspiracy theories, sorry, "truthing" here?
DeleteThat statue of Machiavelli makes him look positively Machiavellian.
"That statue of Machiavelli makes him look positively Machiavellian" lol that was my thought too
DeleteAnon 7:57,
DeleteI would rather spend 20 minutes talking to an incredibly talented, gifted, and amusing liar than an incredibly boring, but truthful person any day. Life is short. A smile on my face and a dose of full hearted laughter once in awhile is quite healthy. Just because I won't believe you or trust you, doesn't mean I will condemn you.
MelissaR
And then you wonder why people call you a cunt.
DeleteSociopaths can be trusted with your life, so long as it doesn't harm their own. To be selfless is to be selfish to the desire to be loved.
DeleteI don't get rid of the impression, that some of the empaths posting here seek to get the appreciation, they were refused to get from "their" sociopaths.
DeleteWe do not have to love socios for beeing amusing liars (hope they know something else) nor do we have to prove our regained souvereignty.
Anon 12:47 - You can kiss my fat, white, dimply ass. (Smile)
DeleteAnon 12:50 - There are few people I actually trust with my life.
Anon 1:23 - I have no idea what you wrote.
MelissaR
Do neurotypicals really behave altruistically? without motive? I'm struggling to believe in the "good" in anyone.
ReplyDeleteGood and evil are opinioned constructs. It's never about what you see, but what the other person believes.
DeleteIt is common to want to feel good and validate the good in themselves (among other things) so that they can function. It keeps themselves and others both on the receiving and giving ends, and that behavior keeps a sense of stability and reciprocity between people. Even if that drive to validate is for their own gain, they may consciously act without motive and do things that do not knowingly benefit them. Mostly it is a matter of balancing good and bad, and finding the grey area that equals enough social and personal reward to result in whatever the individual deems as success.
DeleteBeing able to turn on or off the emotional, empathetic switch and adjusting immediately to any given circumstance is a very powerful trait. Most people are in a grey area. That grey area does not completely exist for many people, and frequent extremes around that area can prove very tiring. It is a matter of coexisting to meet one's needs while satisfying a natural impulse to avoid pain. Even still, the type of love known as “giving love” and empathy can create emotional bonds. Interestingly enough, these bonds have a tendency to generate the purest form of altruism I have found, so long as they are maintained. Patience with developing boundaries can often have a better personal result than knowing manipulation. However, I do not believe anyone behaves without motive, at least not consciously, whether or not there is empathy involved. Essentially there is no one right answer and it is not an easy one.
People do acts consciously, just not necessarily rationally. Also what they do may be driven by an emotional good, however it may be more accurately to say what they believe is "right" (instead of good).
DeleteAlso, is there really a purest form of altruism? Can someone realistically (not conceptually or ideally) be selfless with zero recognition from anyone? That is to say, to give something without any emotional reciprocation whatsoever? For example, how would you feel if you gave food to a homeless man and he didn't even thank you for it? He just silently takes it without acknowledging you or the act at all - not even internally. Does it still make you feel good for him not to be grateful?
Anon 400
ReplyDeleteWell said !