Just read this and I'm sure you will find it without charity... but you must ask yourself: do you think it's all lies to make Trump look bad?https://www.quora.com/Did-Trump-s-lawyers-really-mean-to-call-a-press-conference-at-a-landscaping-company/answer/Nelson-McKeeby …
-
-
Replying to @justinsail @Lacrymabiliter and
I read this. You can find incompetence anywhere. I’m sure there’s another side to these stories that are not acknowledged or represented. But apart from that, the A-list vs D-list distinction is hubristic. I also don’t know why an MFA from LA would be hiring A-listers....
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @joelvanbrunt @justinsail and
....but the initial part of this reminds me of the “swampiness” that has many in right concerned. Sets up the elites against the irredeemable and “those you should feel sorry for.” But this writer writes well and no doubt stirs the embers of contempt among the adherents.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @joelvanbrunt @justinsail and
For a counterbalance, consider
@ScottAdamsSays where he effectively deconstructs the critique of narcissism. “It’s an observer problem”. Start at 20:30 and play at 2x. Worth it. Episode 1232 Scott Adams: Saturday, December 26, 2020 http://www.scottadamssays.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Episode-1232-Scott-Adams-Nashville-Narcissism-Congress-Sucks.mp3 …1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @joelvanbrunt @Lacrymabiliter and
So it’s all lies to make trump look bad. The observers are deranged. Got it. I will check out Adams’s pod, but honestly there is zero chance he’s gonna convince me that the narcissism we all see in broad daylight in DJT... is in my head.
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
-
Replying to @joelvanbrunt @Lacrymabiliter and
Listened yesterday. The early sections on the diversity of his comic strip and transgender stuff seems right on to me. Then his attempt to posit himself as an expert on psychology is absolutely ridiculous. Worse, it’s deranged and proves his own extreme narcissism.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @justinsail @joelvanbrunt and
I mean his whole argument is that each individual feature of clinical narcissism can exist in anyone. That’s true, but worthless as an argument because narcissism isn’t just one of these characteristics... it’s many together. His argument belies a total ignorance of psychology...
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @justinsail @joelvanbrunt and
You misunderstood the argument if you think the point is that anyone can have an individual feature.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @joelvanbrunt and
Okay, but that’s what you said over and over. Most of the pod was spent going through each line of the narcissism traits and you telling us that they’re normal and lots of people have them. I’m happy to engage with the real argument you made but that’s what I got.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The point is that lots of people have different clusters of symptoms. I didn't label them "normal." Most are real mental illness. Giving a random cluster a name is not useful unless the same pill works on all of it, or it has one identifiable cause, which is not the case.
-
-
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @joelvanbrunt and
What makes you think they’re random? Have you studied the history of the DSM on this disorder? And was I correct that your motivation for challenging the existence of this disorder is related to Trump?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @justinsail @joelvanbrunt and
Random was an imprecise word. They just don't line up with their named categories, which makes the naming standards nonsense. And no to the second question. It's personal.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.