Видео

Appreciate it bro

Hey, welcome! I'm curious to hear your thoughts on what might be some exceptions?

My pleasure! I'm glad you took something from the video!

No, it's actually based primarily on research and the logical implications of that research. I've just so happen to have also repeatedly observed what has been observed and tested scientifically. The term "empath" can be understood in psychological terms as being agreeable from a personality perspective. Being agreeable is associated with giving others the benefit of the doubt and also serving others. If you're excessively agreeable, you're likely to perceive someone predatory as good or at least salvageable, and then you'll be exploited. If you're too morally arrogant to let go of your moralizing frame of reference after being exploited so it can be updated to something more sophisticated and includes an understanding of predators as well as how to effectively deal with them, you'll likely be exploited repeatedly.

Care to elaborate on your comment in this specific context?

Let's unpack this. Sure, there are some people who identify as empaths who also have had traumatic experiences. In fact, there's a very logical reason that there is a relationship between inclination towards empathy/compassion and being traumatized and it aligns quite nicely with my position that empaths oftentimes lack an understanding of others. Empaths, that is, people who are highly agreeable, tend to be extremely naive; overly trusting of others and project "goodness" onto others even if it's not present. They're oversimplistic in their valuations of others and oftentimes are stubborn when it comes to updating their frames of reference to account for reality. PTSD happens whenever someone experiences a traumatic event and is unable to fully understand the nature of what occurred and why. The memory of the event is fragmented and re-presented to the individual as a way of exposing them to the event because they haven't fully come to grips with it; guided exposure therapy which leads to understanding is often the cure to trauma. Again, the reason empaths become traumatized in the first place is that their moral frames of reference insufficiently account for reality which leaves them vulnerable to exploitation. Lastly, this hypersensitivity you speak of as a result of being traumatized is not a direct function of empathy, but rather the psychological trait neuroticism.

@@TechnicallyAWizard Your explanation kind of seems to be mixing 2 different ideas together. What you're describing is trauma responses in general. Some of the things you are stating as fact are opinion or conclusion drawn from a very small and narrow lens of what it means to be an 'empath'. You are jumping to conclusions that only support your idea. Projecting good where there isn't any is not just an empath thing. That's a human thing. Lots of people see the best in the world even when you shouldn't. Also, people who are incredibly aware of others moods and such tend to NOT be overly trusting or naive. They are more aware of the dark people hide than most. People who are that tuned in to people's behaviors and language usage are usually the first ones to sense when someone is being dishonest or hiding something. It seems like you don't have a solid grasp on what an empath is and are mixing general trauma responses with the specific idea of being an empath. You even said in your video that this is your "observation". How many people did you observe before you jumped on social media to make this video? How many people did you interview? How many people have you even spoken to, in person, that claim to be empaths?

@@FairyMomma I think you're spot on. I would consider myself an empath. I don't just blindly trust people like this video assumes. I also probably don't project "good" at all times (the military does things to people lol). It sounds like he's only met con artists who claim to be something they're not for attention. A true empath can see right through the fakes. I can spot a narcissist fairly quickly. There's probably some overlap, but I doubt this generalization has any truth to it.

@@jamescrumbaker3169 I agree. That's why I asked about the observations that led to this video. It sounds like he hasn't encountered a true empath bc what he describes sounds nothing like any empaths I know or have heard of.

@@FairyMomma Although I've observed this in the real world repeatedly, there's actually plenty of scientific literature on what I'm saying. For instance, being an empath is associated with the psychological trait agreeableness which is a trait of the factor analytically derived model The Big 5. Agreeableness is also associated with being trusting of others and excessive agreeableness can lead to trusting others when they shouldn't; naivety. The trait neuroticism that I previously described is also a trait of the Big 5 and explains the hypersensitivity you mentioned and can emerge when someone has been exploited (often because they're too naive). Furthermore, my description of trauma and the means taken to deal with it (exposure therapy) are well documented as well.

The words morality and truth aren’t interchangeable. Morality pertains to values of rightness and wrongness and moral arguments generally seek to validate the conclusion that a certain value judgement about a thing is justifiably true. While we’re having this discussion, I’d like to know what you think “true” and “objective” actually mean?

@@TechnicallyAWizard _"The words morality and truth aren’t interchangeable."_ LOL Obviously that's glaringly false, and ridiculous, since, in my previous post, you saw those two words interchanged before your very eyes. Google dictionary entry for the word 'morality': _" _*_principles_*_ concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior."_ See that? According to OED, morality is PRINCIPLES. Google dictionary entry for the word 'principle': _"a fundamental _*_truth_*_ or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning."_ Even OED admits that morality is truth(s).

@@TechnicallyAWizard _"I’d like to know what you think “true” and “objective” actually mean?"_ I don't think _any_ word means anything. Despite stupid, popular slogans, _words_ don't mean things. Only _sayers of words_ (and only sometimes) mean things.

@@alltimeislikethepresent That’s apparent because you’re using words loosely without considering their implications or validity given the context. However, I’ll play ball. Again, since some sayers of words supposedly mean something, and because words convey information about these sayers, it isn’t unreasonable to once again ask what you think objective and true mean? You don’t have to dodge the question. You might even learn something.

@@TechnicallyAWizard _"That’s apparent"_ Which (if any) proposition are you referring to by your pronoun, "that"? _"you’re using words loosely"_ To which words are you referring? What (if anything) do you mean by your phrase, _"using words loosely"?_ _"it isn’t unreasonable to once again ask what you think objective and true mean?"_ What part of _"Words do not mean things"_ did you not get? Since words do not mean things, the word "objective" does not mean anything. Since words do not mean things, the word "true" does not mean anything. _"You don’t have to dodge the question."_ You don't have to lie about the fact that I answered your question, just because the answer I gave you is inconvenient to your futile quest to try to prop up your silliness. By my having stated that words do not mean things, was I not stating (among other things) therein that 1) the word "objective" does not mean anything, and that 2) the word "true" does not mean anything? Yes, I was. _"words convey information about these sayers"_ I don't know what (if anything) you mean by that. Can you describe exactly what you would say a word is doing whenever it is, as you say, "conveying information"?

Hahaha thank you :D I'm glad to hear that!

Lmao.. Gotta do it for the Tube.

Glad I could make you laugh! :D

Hahah, nice. Great minds think alike.