You're just trying to copy me, aren't you, with your uncanny behavioral predictions. But like I said, it won't work, because you don't have truth on your side. You just end up looking silly. And that's right, Mr. Deceptive, my Law of Truth #1 is not a "psychological law". It is not part of the psychological science of sociopathy and has nothing to do with my assessment of you as a sociopath. That assessment is based on comparing your behavior with the behavioral traits of sociopaths listed in the psychological literature. It is not based on my countering The 48 Laws of Power, which, Mr. Deceptive, are also not psychological laws! So do you have any examples of Chico creating "his own laws of psychology", or are you just spouting your usual deceptive BS?
http://www.inphinet.net/threads/law-1-never-outshine-the-master-sociopathic-or-not.403/#post-4662 Pax ps: Chico's put so much junk out there to confuse the masses, that he's become confused himself. Of course, he'll probably now claim that Law of Truth#1 (that he pulled from his top hat along with a fluffy white rabbit) ... is not really a psychological law. Chico rarely ever admits his self-contradictions.
Does anyone else find it curious that Chico creates his own laws about psychology ... even as he detracts from Greene's laws? I can see how Chico might view his own laws as scientific (dogmatic laws notwithstanding). Of course, the lack of proper study has never stopped Chico from chiseling conclusions onto stone tablets before, so why should it now? Carry on, Chico of La Mancha, there's apples around the bend for Rocinante. Pax
Law of Truth #6 -- Beware the attention whore People who draw excessive attention to themselves are usually disingenuous. They are typically shallow, superficial, deceptive, and manipulative. They have something to sell that most people would not normally want. Creating attention is primarily an advertising ploy. For example, con-artists create excessive attention to pull in the rubes, who are going to get cheated.
. That said: People who always demand to be the center of attention wherever they are are one of my pet peeves. I am voting "Yes" on this one. Observing the law: Courting Attention At All Costs is a sociopathic act.
I agree "At All Cost" is extreme and crosses reasonable boundaries. In listening to this law and considering possible sociopathic implications, I find myself guilty of a majority of these points. Not for myself, per se, but as owner of this site, I have utilized at least five of these recommendations in varying degrees. The scandalous, better to be slandered than ignored aspect was not my original intent, but seems to have taken a life of it's own now. I am curious to know if members here believe I have taken attention seeking methods to a sociopathic level. Sensationalism at InPHInet was another of Steve Nick's digs at me near the end. Humorous if you ever read Cockney Translater.
Law of Power #6 -- Court Attention at all Cost In other words, be a drama queen. This is great advice for a sociopath, who has nothing of substance to rely on anyway. At 0:27, "Everything is judged by its appearance; what is unseen counts for nothing." This is simply not true. In The Little Prince, by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, we learn "L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux." Translation: The most essential things cannot be seen by the eyes. Honesty, integrity, compassion, empathy, and love are typical examples. Of course, to sociopaths, this is all meaningless, hence we have the bogus Law of Power #6. At 0:48, "Burning more brightly than those around you..."? Whatever happened to Law # 1, Never outshine the master? Already we are seeing the contradiction and hypocrisy inherent in the sociopathic mindset. Should we also court attention at the cost of reputation, violating Law of Power #5? Again, we see the contradiction and hypocrisy inherent in the sociopathic mindset. There is no integrity, but then, we know that from the context of the laws, which is studying the behaviors of sociopaths, the morally insane.
At all costs, implies that the end is more important than the means, e.g. the end justifies the means. I've argued previously that no empathic law can ever support the end without also considering the means. And in this narrative of empathy, if the cost is too much then pursuit of the end must be terminated. In the narrative of sociopathy, there are no such obstacles (e.g. the consideration of cost) to the pursuit of the end, ergo, at all costs. The law - isolated from Greene's overall narrative of sociopathic ambition - is still inescapably sociopathic. IMO. Pax
