Worried that I'm sadistic

[SotiCoto]

Well, I just want to say that I'm glad that others have experienced what I'm experiencing. But, how do we know that these thoughts are acceptable? Is it because they're thoughts and not actions?

Does anyone remember the Russel Williams case? About that women who said that she didn't want to die? Although I feel a slight groinal response to that, my thoughts about that case are those of anger and depression, not arousal or excitement or whatever...Real life things like that case are nightmares.

Maybe my feelings towards real life sexual abuse and evil mean that I'm not as messed up as I think I am.

Maybe. Maybe not.

There is a divide between the intents and opinions of the thinking mind... and the biases, agenda and quirks of the body... or the subconscious... however one wishes to define it.

So far as I can tell, most do not distinguish between the two. They consider themselves a united entity... and make no attempt to consider the inconsistencies in opinion that arise between rational consideration of intent and ... well... feelings. Worse yet (from my perspective), they tend to side with the feelings more often than not... believing it "more honest".

Of course it isn't.
A mind and body can hold different opinions.
The mind and body both, on an individual basis, can also harbour conflicting or contradictory ideas... though there is usually a contextual divide between them.

The point is that it doesn't have to add up.

You can be a perfectly nice person in general terms, and STILL get aroused by someone's humiliation. Trying to reconcile the two is pointless. The trick is just to stop them coming into conflict.

 

[Flanscho]

Ah yes. Empathy. That disability.

I'd say I'm glad I don't have it, but I'm not sure that is an entirely accurate statement. It is more like I have reverse empathy. I derive joy from the suffering of others, but contrariwise I get angry, miserable or straight-up nauseous when people are happy around me.

A person with a lack of empathy is the way you can define "psychopath". I'm not sure whether such a person should be here on this forum, where people can be hurt quite easily, and you enjoy making people obviously suffer, while not being able to add helpful advice since that would require some sort of empathy.

And calling empathy a disability? Either you are a troll, or you are insane. I know that sounds rough, but nothing else makes sense in that matter.

 

[myheartisastone]

A person with a lack of empathy is the way you can define "psychopath". I'm not sure whether such a person should be here on this forum, where people can be hurt quite easily, and you enjoy making people obviously suffer, while not being able to add helpful advice since that would require some sort of empathy.

And calling empathy a disability? Either you are a troll, or you are insane. I know that sounds rough, but nothing else makes sense in that matter.

A lot of people mistake empathy as "weakness". They don't realize that empathy is the only gateway towards compassion and self-knowledge as well as knowledge of others.

Without empathy, you cannot love, you cannot truly understand others.

I get angry, miserable or straight-up nauseous when people are happy around me.

Many people feel that way. It means that they are deeply miserable (they don't feel they deserve happiness, so they don't believe others do, either). Misery loves company.

 

[SotiCoto]

A person with a lack of empathy is the way you can define "psychopath". I'm not sure whether such a person should be here on this forum, where people can be hurt quite easily, and you enjoy making people obviously suffer, while not being able to add helpful advice since that would require some sort of empathy.

And calling empathy a disability? Either you are a troll, or you are insane. I know that sounds rough, but nothing else makes sense in that matter.

I really don't have the social skills to be an effective psychopath.
Plus the whole getting annoyed at people being happy thing.
I really wish I did have absolutely no sort of reaction whatsoever. Would make life a whole lot easier.

Meh... what's the use... you're not even listening anyway.

Anyway... yeah. Empathy is a disability.
What else would you call being personally hindered every time someone is having a bad time near you? If someone beside you got hurt and is crying... and you're all suffering empathic backlash, wouldn't you wish you didn't?

 

[myheartisastone]

I really don't have the social skills to be an effective psychopath.
Plus the whole getting annoyed at people being happy thing.
I really wish I did have absolutely no sort of reaction whatsoever. Would make life a whole lot easier.

Meh... what's the use... you're not even listening anyway.

Anyway... yeah. Empathy is a disability.
What else would you call being personally hindered every time someone is having a bad time near you? If someone beside you got hurt and is crying... and you're all suffering empathic backlash, wouldn't you wish you didn't?

Empathy is not a disability. Emotions can be hard to deal with and feel, and many people wish they did not have them. However;

If you have no empathy, you have no feeling for others and therefore none for yourself. You also have no conscience.

Also, remember that if you cannot feel the bad emotions, there is no possibility to enjoy the good ones, either.

 

[Flanscho]

Anyway... yeah. Empathy is a disability.
What else would you call being personally hindered every time someone is having a bad time near you? If someone beside you got hurt and is crying... and you're all suffering empathic backlash, wouldn't you wish you didn't?

If you seriously believe that, you actually do have major mental problems, because you ignore all logic to replace reality with some sort of fantasy world in which those weird claims of yours could make some sort of sense.

 

[SotiCoto]

A lot of people mistake empathy as "weakness". They don't realize that empathy is the only gateway towards compassion and self-knowledge as well as knowledge of others.

Without empathy, you cannot love, you cannot truly understand others.

You're mixing up knowledge and feelings. It is a common mistake for one who relies too strongly on the latter. There is a whole convoluted explanation behind it, but .... meh. No real reason to wax lyrical about it.

The only point worth making is that folks with normal empathy cannot meaningfully "empathise" with those who aren't "in the club", so to speak.
The lack of ability to have things explained to them is particularly jarring. Like if they don't "feeeeel" it it can't be real.

Is all alien to me anyway.

Many people feel that way. It means that they are deeply miserable (they don't feel they deserve happiness, so they don't believe others do, either). Misery loves company.

"Deserve" isn't an appropriate word. For that matter your boolean assessment of the situation isn't particularly appropriate either... Mighty dismissive, for that matter... But that doesn't matter so much.

I don't appreciate the happies for the same reason normal empathic people don't appreciate the sads : Makes for crap feels. Capice?

If you seriously believe that, you actually do have major mental problems, because you ignore all logic to replace reality with some sort of fantasy world in which those weird claims of yours could make some sort of sense.

You'd need to actually supply some logic in order to meaningfully conclude that I were ignoring it.
And so as not to leave it merely up to implication... you haven't done so.
In fact, what you are using right there is merely a simple rhetorical device.

And what it means in a meta-sense is that you're reacting to something unfamiliar or otherwise personally incompatible with hostility.
The thing is, I doubt you're actually capable of NOT doing so... or even mounting any lasting resistance to doing so.

So I won't take it personally.

Empathy is not a disability. Emotions can be hard to deal with and feel, and many people wish they did not have them. However;

If you have no empathy, you have no feeling for others and therefore none for yourself. You also have no conscience.

Also, remember that if you cannot feel the bad emotions, there is no possibility to enjoy the good ones, either.

You seem to be operating under the bizarre premise that I don't have emotions.

Fun fact : I do.
I just don't act on them (not least because their assessment of things is horrendously lacking). I don't express them. I do my utmost to completely ignore them. Mangling them and shoving their broken remains in the deepest pit of my subconscious is about the only way I can tolerate existence... and fortunately I'm quite good at doing just that.

 

[MollyBeGood]

Interesting debate. I think our whole society is sadistic or being taught to be so by popular culture. It is rare if a person isn't at all and if they say they are not they are probably just not in touch with that side of themselves.
As far as feeling zero empathy-that is really a bit frightening imho. Does SotiCoto feel anything for any species, like if an animal is hurt do you feel saddened? Your pet dog is hit by a car, not a tear? I kinda doubt it...It's pretty easy for people to say they enjoy watching others suffer anymore if you notice how ultra-violent our world has become. It's scary as hell.. there's so many people like that out there, who do have good social skills, and are full-blown sociopaths.

 

[myheartisastone]

Calling empathy a "disability" means everyone that has empathy is disabled somehow.

This does not make logical sense. Perhaps you feel disabled by empathy?

I don't appreciate the happies for the same reason normal empathic people don't appreciate the sads : Makes for crap feels. Capice?

No one who is miserable appreciates happy people. Perhaps you resent people for feeling happy because you don't feel that way yourself.

 

[MollyBeGood]

Calling empathy a "disability" means everyone that has empathy is disabled somehow.

This does not make logical sense. Perhaps you feel disabled by empathy?

I am an emotional sponge, so I can almost see way he would say that

 

[SotiCoto]

Interesting debate. I think our whole society is sadistic or being taught to be so by popular culture. It is rare if a person isn't at all and if they say they are not they are probably just not in touch with that side of themselves.

It isn't so much sadism for the average person as having limits on just how much concern one is capable of having.
For instance, did you know that the absolute maximum number of identities / people / characters a single person is capable of knowing on a personal basis is 150. For those of us who live in big cities, we go past more people than that on a daily basis. It is actually impossible to consider them all individually as personages with their own lives, opinions and ideas... The brain simply doesn't have the processing power for it. So it effectively categorises people into types... so then it can treat all members of a type the same way, and consider them all essentially as a contiguous unit.

Long story short... most people don't intend to be mean, and don't intend to be sadistic... they're just subconsciously objectifying / simplifying strangers so their brain can process the data. It is an imperfect system, but it is all we can work with.

As far as feeling zero empathy-that is really a bit frightening imho. Does SotiCoto feel anything for any species, like if an animal is hurt do you feel saddened? Your pet dog is hit by a car, not a tear? I kinda doubt it...It's pretty easy for people to say they enjoy watching others suffer anymore if you notice how ultra-violent our world has become. It's scary as hell.. there's so many people like that out there, who do have good social skills, and are full-blown sociopaths.

I see you've bought into the false rumour being spread by the others.
As I have reiterated several times... what I have is more akin to reverse empathy than a complete absence. It plays out quite differently in practice to what you're describing. PLUS, as previously mentioned, I don't consider said emotional signals to be good triggers for sensible behaviour (an opinion I extend to the emotions of other people too, obviously).

Calling empathy a "disability" means everyone that has empathy is disabled somehow.

This does not make logical sense. Perhaps you feel disabled by empathy?

On the contrary, it makes perfect sense. Afterall, there is nothing about disability as an idea that means anyone has to be necessarily exempt.
It is, in its most general terms, a condition that hinders your ability to do some things under some circumstances... Now that definition is a bit broad for most practical purposes, but I believe it should get the point across.

Consider an example : If it weren't for empathy, would taking hostages be so viable a tactic in situations of highly unbalanced conflict?

No one who is miserable appreciates happy people. Perhaps you resent people for feeling happy because you don't feel that way yourself.

If that was so, why would I also endeavour to dismantle and deactivate that emotion along with the rest? It is a distraction and it hinders judgement. Not to mention that it is addictive.

 

[NathanielWingatePeaslee]

Not to mention that it is addictive.

As addictive as attention from strangers on internet forums?

 

[SotiCoto]

As addictive as attention from strangers on internet forums?

Moreso, but I get your point.
Touché.

Still, I don't go around telling people they ought to be posting on forums more... nor dismissing / belittling their way of life for not doing so... as tends to be the trend.

 

[MollyBeGood]

As addictive as attention from strangers on internet forums?

.............................erfect:

 

[Kiwong]

I can't see how sadism can be a healthy state of mind.

Perhaps mascochism and sadism are manifestations of low self esteem in a sex life?

 

[Flanscho]

You'd need to actually supply some logic in order to meaningfully conclude that I were ignoring it.
And so as not to leave it merely up to implication... you haven't done so.
In fact, what you are using right there is merely a simple rhetorical device.

And what it means in a meta-sense is that you're reacting to something unfamiliar or otherwise personally incompatible with hostility.
The thing is, I doubt you're actually capable of NOT doing so... or even mounting any lasting resistance to doing so.

I react hostile to people who post nonsense for the sole purpose of contradicting others and trying to sound dramatically negative.

Without that what you call a "disability", societies worldwide would collapse and mankind would fall into barbary.

 

[myheartisastone]

I react hostile to people who post nonsense for the sole purpose of contradicting others and trying to sound dramatically negative.

Without that what you call a "disability", societies worldwide would collapse and mankind would fall into barbary.

I may be depressed/anxious, but i'm still not misantropic. I don't hate or wish ill upon people. I never have. I've always found it kind of weird and remarkable that coming from an abusive household that pretty much held no empathy, I still managed to have it for other people. It doesn't always work out that way.

It most certainly doesn't "disable" me from anything. If anything it enables me to understand people to a depth a lot of people do not have. It is a doubled-edged sword -- you feel pain more deeply, but you also feel good emotions deeply, too. And i'd rather feel that way than not feel anything at all.

At least that way you know you're alive.

 

[planetweirdo]

You'd need to actually supply some logic in order to meaningfully conclude that I were ignoring it.
And so as not to leave it merely up to implication... you haven't done so.
In fact, what you are using right there is merely a simple rhetorical device.


.

Just because someone don't use the same kind of reasoning as you, doesn't make them illogical. To me it's illogical for one to try to suppress their emotions. My reasoning is different from yours. Suppressing your emotions doesn't automatically make you more logical then people that don't. Especially if no one else in the world can find reason in your "logic" other then you. It seems to me that your just trying to rationalize your own bad, and self-destructive behavior. Trying to suppress your emotions instead of learning how to cope with them and express them appropriately is self-destructive. And trying to bring about suffering is terrible behavior.

 

[A86]

I have to admit, I often wonder if society would be better off without some emotions.

When I was young I was told the saying "sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me", while it made logical sense I have found the reverse to be true, as emotional hurt tends to hurt more inside and heal less quickly. Way easier to get over a broken leg.

I mean if people could take in what others say objectively and form their own opinions without inciting an emotional response, would we not all get along better? (I know I incite bad emotional feeling when I am told a differing opinions & it hurts deep, often makes me fell hostile towards that person even if I don't show it, I have to remind myself its just an opinion and I need to agree to disagree, but I am left wondering why the hell my body incites such a powerful, negative, and influential emotion as a response to begin with?)

I believe in free speech, and it seems "political correctness" hinders free thought these days and is basically to help the people inciting these emotional responses to others opinions cope. How can we expand our ideas if we culturally repress opinions to be politically correct.

Emotions seem to encourage action or inaction, some of which seem out-dated for use. Two people having differing opinions then having emotional outburst leading to actions that harm each other just seems silly when I think about it. Whatever purpose it once served is no longer relevant.

 

[Flanscho]

I have to admit, I often wonder if society would be better off without some emotions.

Without emotions we'd have no society.