• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Sociopaths

blutoski said:
Until we invent a dipstick that detects souls as reliably as we can detect deaths from cancer, Hinn's pretty safe.
Click to expand...

I'm working on one of those. It lights up whenever it detects a soul. So far, results are 100% negative (as expected).
 
acuity said:
That's exactly what I meant—I was referring to the grief-striken.

We are in violent agreement. Calling them sociopaths is a wrong-headed attempt to demonise them IMO and contrary to critical thinking.
Click to expand...

Ok, well, who deserves demonization more than someone who exploits the vulnerability and suffering of grieving people for monetary gain? I have this suspicion that you are inclined to believe there might be such things as genuine psychics. There are not. And they are in fact sociopaths by and reasonable standard.
 
billydkid said:
Ok, well, who deserves demonization more than someone who exploits the vulnerability and suffering of grieving people for monetary gain? I have this suspicion that you are inclined to believe there might be such things as genuine psychics. There are not. And they are in fact sociopaths by and reasonable standard.
Click to expand...
Are you kidding? Demonisation? Are you religious? :eek:
 
OK, the topic of the thread has now definitely shifted from "are psychics sociopaths" to "should society legislate for more protection against the large number of sociopaths in it". Which is going to boil down to "free market is better/worse than intervention", which is going to end up as the usual argument between politically opposed believers that no amount of critical thinking is going to solve.
 
Maybe not, Our laws already jail ripoff artists who prey on the vulnerable. Why not procecute Browne and Edward for doing the same? "For entertainment purposes"?
 
Jeff Corey said:
Maybe not, Our laws already jail ripoff artists who prey on the vulnerable. Why not procecute Browne and Edward for doing the same? "For entertainment purposes"?
Click to expand...

My sentiments entirely. But with the present laws the prosecution will most likely not stick, which brings us back to the need for more specific legislation and the related political debate. Freedom has its drawbacks!
 
acuity said:
Are you kidding? Demonisation? Are you religious? :eek:
Click to expand...

Maybe you didn't read your own post which I quoted. You referred to a wrong headed (or something) attempt to demonize psychics. If anyone does deserve demonization it would be those who exploit the suffering of others.
 
billydkid said:
If anyone does deserve demonization it would be those who exploit the suffering of others.
Click to expand...
they are in fact sociopaths by and reasonable standard.
Click to expand...

OK well I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you were not saying "demonise" in a religious/spiritual context . . .(?)

You think they are evil and sociopathic. I think you exaggerate. Personally I don't think it is very sceptical to denounce people like psychics as demons and sociopaths. Merely wrong, perhaps mindfully wrong, perhaps exploitative of a target market. Your idea is too emotive for me, not born of critical analysis but of a zealous desire for some kind of moral crusade. I think your stance fuels the "atheism is a faith" challenge. It's not for me :)
 
acuity said:
OK well I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you were not saying "demonise" in a religious/spiritual context . . .(?)

You think they are evil and sociopathic. I think you exaggerate. Personally I don't think it is very sceptical to denounce people like psychics as demons and sociopaths. Merely wrong, perhaps mindfully wrong, perhaps exploitative of a target market. Your idea is too emotive for me, not born of critical analysis but of a zealous desire for some kind of moral crusade. I think your stance fuels the "atheism is a faith" challenge. It's not for me :)
Click to expand...

You are just being whacky. You brought up the term "demonize". I did not call anyone a demon and the expression is often used to describe evil people and things without any religious implication whatsoever. Yes, I am an atheist. No, atheism is not a religion. Yes, I think people who exploit the suffering of others are evil. Apparently you do not.
 
Look what I found following a link from another thread:

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The University Of Metaphysical Sciences is a non-profit organization under
Universal Church Of Metaphysics 501(c)3
which is registered as a non-profit corporation in both states, California and Wyoming, USA [/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The University Of Metaphysical Sciences, offering courses in metaphysical studies is a program of The Universal Church Of Metaphysics. It is the part of the ministry that allows us to give the public inexpensive access to metaphysical concepts and metaphysical training for professional work in this growing field. Ministerial licenses for those who obtain the Masters degree are granted by The Universal Church Of Metaphysics. The University Of Metaphysical Sciences grants metaphysics degrees based on the metaphysical nature of the church, which is a specialized area of religion[/FONT]


Donations to this Church are tax deductible, ie. subsidised by you, the taxpayer.

If you want to live in a libertarian society that does not discriminate on the basis of the BS one teaches, where the State does not take responsibility for the quality of accreditation and anybody can call himself Doctor without being prosecutable for false pretences, you have to accept its less palatable side also.

Is "never give a sucker an even break" a desirable or undesirable trait of a civilisation? You can't have it both ways.
 
billydkid said:
You are just being whacky. You brought up the term "demonize". I did not call anyone a demon and the expression is often used to describe evil people and things without any religious implication whatsoever. Yes, I am an atheist. No, atheism is not a religion. Yes, I think people who exploit the suffering of others are evil. Apparently you do not.
Click to expand...
Please define "evil". What "atrocities" do you think they might commit if it served their interests?
 
I have a little theory that at least some of the people who claim to be able to talk the dead may be experiencing a self perpetuating form of Multiple Personality Disorder, where they act as their own 'therapist' and encourage their own character and memory generation and reinforce it. As a result they may genuinely believe they have these abilities.
Just a thought.

I wrote a longer thread about it somewhere...

Ah here it is:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33595
 
acuity said:
Calling them sociopaths is a wrong-headed attempt to demonise them IMO and contrary to critical thinking.
Click to expand...
The two are not mutually exclusive, as you seem to think. In fact, many of them are clinical sociopaths. That doesn't mean that one cannot use critical thinking to evaluate the claims made by any person asking for your money, sociopath or not.

Regarding an earlier comment about sociopaths in business, I read an article a number of years ago that claimed that a huge majority of those in upper-management positions are clinical socipaths. The gist was that the monomaniacal drive, charismatic manipulativeness, and self-indulgent greed typical of sociopathic personality disorder was often mistaken for ambition, work ethic, vision, and success in the business world; and that's a key factor in the problem with many American corporations.
 
Thinktoomuch said:
If you want to live in a libertarian society that does not discriminate on the basis of the BS one teaches, where the State does not take responsibility for the quality of accreditation and anybody can call himself Doctor without being prosecutable for false pretences, you have to accept its less palatable side also.
Click to expand...
Two problems: one, claiming to be a Doctor without possessing medical credentials is fraud, even in a libertarian society; two, in a libertarian society, pychics would not get government money or privileges like they do in our current one. Religions and psychics would pay taxes and user fees just like anyone else.
 
luchog said:
, in a libertarian society, pychics would not get government money or privileges like they do in our current one.
Click to expand...

Psychics receive government money?

Religions and psychics would pay taxes and user fees just like anyone else.
Click to expand...

I have never heard the claim that psychics are exempt from taxes. Is that true?
 
luchog said:
Regarding an earlier comment about sociopaths in business, I read an article a number of years ago that claimed that a huge majority of those in upper-management positions are clinical socipaths. The gist was that the monomaniacal drive, charismatic manipulativeness, and self-indulgent greed typical of sociopathic personality disorder was often mistaken for ambition, work ethic, vision, and success in the business world; and that's a key factor in the problem with many American corporations.
Click to expand...
What's a "huge majority"? Hundreds of thousands of people are in senior business management. If the diagnosis captures enough people in it, then I think it is not going to mean much.

It all sounds to me a bit like: take a personality type or belief set that you don't like (this is WRT the psychics . . .), and call it diseased. I am assuming you and others think of sociopathology as a disease. Would you consider removing liberties from these sociopathic managers? Or getting them some treatment? Or nothing?
 
Last edited:
acuity said:
What's a "huge majority"? Hundreds of thousands of people are in senior business management. If the diagnosis captures enough people in it, then I think it is not going to mean much.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure I’m following your logic here. You’re saying that if the diagnosis includes too many people the diagnosis becomes meaningless? I’m fairly sure that there are millions of people diagnosed with AIDS. How about schizophrenia? Approximately 1% of Americans have some type schizophrenia according to the National Institute of Mental Health. That is about 3 million people in the US alone; does that make the diagnosis not mean much?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom