Ars OpenForum

[url=http://meincmagazine.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=28319289#p28319289:2pzyjzi0 said:

RFT[/url]":2pzyjzi0]

[url=http://meincmagazine.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=28319135#p28319135:2pzyjzi0 said:

vlam[/url]":2pzyjzi0]

[url=http://meincmagazine.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=28318095#p28318095:2pzyjzi0 said:

MattEvansC3[/url]":2pzyjzi0]

[url=http://meincmagazine.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=28317791#p28317791:2pzyjzi0 said:

vlam[/url]":2pzyjzi0]

[url=http://meincmagazine.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=28317745#p28317745:2pzyjzi0 said:

Coriolanus[/url]":2pzyjzi0]After all, nobody would take seriously a guy who claims that he has lung cancer or lupus without any medical evidence or a professional diagnosis, either.

Click to expand...

Surely you jest. If someone made the claim that they had a terminal illness, nobody would question it. There are anecdotes of this. People don't naturally request proof of medical diagnoses unless they are in the medical field and it is their job.

You know what real sociopaths don't do?

They don't talk about how they're sociopaths, and certainly they don't try to tell everybody on the internet how they are a sociopath, either. They wouldn't give two shits about it.

Click to expand...

Um,
1. Nobody here believes me anyway. If my effort is to not be discovered, there is no harm in telling a room of disbelievers.
2. This is the internet. If my effort is to not be discovered, telling a group of anonymous people via anonymity will not hamper my effort.
3. This whole "sociopaths don't give shits about anything, ever" is very clearly incorrect. Sociopaths, unlike psychopaths, have a code of morality. It may be greatly warped from that of society, but it is a morality nonetheless. They also will have a very, very small "inner circle" of people they are able to act "normally" (read as: like normal people) around. This circle can vary in size or even consist of nobody but themselves.
3b. Is life not easier when you are able to act like yourself? Don't sociopaths act in their best interest?
4. Considering 3 and 3b, would it not be logical for a sociopath to see being accepted for what he/she is without societal rejection as the perfect outcome?
5. Read 4 from the perspective of someone who isn't ambitious. Certainly, anyone with the ambition to succeed and become better (perhaps "more" is a better word?), when combined with being a sociopath, will see being hidden as a benefit to their goals. It is easier to take advantage of people when they aren't aware of it.
6 (should be after 1 and 2, but I don't want to go back and edit). Mixing in a bit of whimsicality makes it even less likely people will believe me, as some might misconstrue my statements as trolling or satire (which seems to be all reactions so far).

If you act pleasantly to people to make social interactions easier, then you don't have asperger's, either.

Click to expand...

I never said I had that. My problems do not stem from inability to act sociably. I simply prefer not being social at all. I want to be left alone. I was simply stating that I was accused (rather rudely, as it were) of having asperger's.

Click to expand...

Nobody believes you because you are making up your own definition of sociopath so that it coincides with your behaviour.

First off there is no diagnosis of sociopath. The diagnosis is Anti-Social Personality Disorder. Modern psychopathy, which includes sociopathy is derived from the work of Robert Hare who proposed that in his opinion the difference between a pschopath and sociopath was about morality but also acknowledged that the terms are used interchangeably and that others use Socio to imply the condition is caused by that person's surroundings or Psycho to imply its part of their psyche and that's how their brain was wired.

Click to expand...

[snip]

I do enjoy a good argument; it passes time and is better than staring at a blank screen. But in the end, that is all this is. An argument. I don't get emotionally invested in them. Someone earlier asked why you would post about something if you didn't care, but really? People are emotionally invested in everything they discuss? Doesn't that get tiring?

Click to expand...

On the off-chance that you're serious: I have many, many choices for what discussion to engage in. Probably millions at every instant. I can't engage in them all, so I triage. I triage by deciding what's important. That could be because it affects the world (see Charlie Hebdo shootings), or because it hits close to home (gamergaters dragging the term "gamer" through the mud again). It can get tiring, but it's how most people decide to engage.

Here's another comment: you may or may not be a sociopath. You also may or may not be a lizard alien. No one knows. What people do know though is that self-diagnoses of psychological issues are almost certainly wrong. Furthermore, people talking at length about their self-diagnosis tend to revel in it. Which means that you are in all likelihood not only wasting everyone's time with an irrelevant story, but possibly also enjoying said wasting of time. That turns people off of reading your posts.

Lastly, from a personal perspective, I can tell you that you can make a choice: you can wallow in your self-diagnosis, withdraw, and play Dr Manhattan. Or you can find ways that make engaging people enjoyable to you, and share that joy with those same people. One way is fun and interesting and challenging. The other is boring. And it's your choice. So make one. But don't be surprised if people judge you from the choice you make.

Click to expand...

Well, millions is certainly an exaggeration. But I do get your point. There are criteria that are weighed when you engage in a topic. This is fine and expected. But "emotional investment" being a criteria for each and every argument you make? That seems implausible at best. Certainly there will be arguments you engage in that have an emotional investment. But it is not a necessity. I'm sure you could argue about "random sports team here" all day without caring one way or the other. I'm sure I could make fun of the NY Jets all day and not give 2 shits, ever. When they're good, they can have praise. When they suck, I'll make fun of them. That discussion, however, doesn't require an emotional investment. It is simply tangential to my interest in football.

For the more personal argument: I wouldn't say I revel in talking about myself. It is pertinent to the tangent I created when trying to comment about perspective and privilege. But I surely don't go about blurting my problems to people for fun. I've told exactly 0 people in the real world. And it is likely to stay that way for a good, long while. As for self diagnosis. This is certainly an assumption on your part.
paragraph p.s. I've been pretty forthcoming that I am in this discussion for amusement. Or perhaps more accurately, I'm in it to stave off boredom. Amusement implies giddiness where I simply mean "something to do."

As for your last paragraph: what gall. Your way of life is better? I could "wallow" in who I am (instead of accepting it as part of me?) or I could conform to your definition of happy and be happy? Sorry, I'm going to call bullshit here. Not wanting to be social is not an attitude to be scorned. Being picky about who you choose to willingly interact with is not something to be scorned. You can ignorantly parade your idea of happiness about as the banner for living if you wish. Just realize exactly what you are doing here. To go back to my gay analogy, this would be akin to a straight person saying that a gay person "could wallow in their homosexuality, but that would be boring." That it would be better for them to "find ways of engaging in heterosexual behavior that is enjoyable." One of these choices is "easy and boring," while the other is "fun and challenging." Further, this gay person "shouldn't be surprised if people judge them for the choice they make."

Life is not meant to be lived the same way by every person. Just like sexual preference should be a free choice and not lorded over a gay person as unclean, so too should my choice. See this hypocrisy.