Session 30 January 2010

I don't think Putin is afraid of that. It was the russians who got working scalar weapons first. This is due to much better education system compared to USA. U.S. only profits from stolen information and from bribery. It was long known that the best minds did not originate in the U.S. but were brought from somewhere else. Just consider why the USA was so keen on joining the WW2 shortly before it ended.

That said Putin is aware of possible threat but is also aware that Russia has all means to counter it. Just remember how one russian plane disabled the pride of us navy - the AEGIS system onboard of their destroyer. The technology used is derived from the field unification theory. And we are only scratching the surface here.

Putin understands that war doesn't solve anything. Even if Russia would be directly attacked they would only defend themselves. Putin knows that Russia is strong and sees no need to boast about that.
Its only those with issues that try to provoke him to prove that they are better and that he is evil.
But anyone who has got two neurons firing knows that only weaklings and cowards jump two metres high and accuse others of things that they themselves are doing.

Putin really cares about people and I don't mean only russians but all people.
 
My take on the definition of psychopath in this session is someone who is perceived correctly to be a psychopath. The Cs say psychopaths are organic portals who are discovered to be psychopathic. So this is why the percentage of psychopaths is smaller than the percentage of organic portals (around 50% from the old session on Pre-Adamics). The percentages do not make sense if the term "psychopaths" used in this session refers to all organic portals and psychopathic souled individuals (who are a rarity) - they would be around 50%.

So it is not surprising that Israel and USA have such a high percentage of known psychopaths because many people know about their wars and exploitation, and have probably met certain people from these countries and then arrived at the conclusion that they are psychopaths. It is actually quite terrifying to see the low percentage for Asian and African countries. I think it requires awareness of the term "psychopath" or other synonyms for people to identify psychopaths. People in countries like Ethiopia do not have much schooling so they are probably not aware of the existence of psychopaths, maybe just a vague idea that certain people are bad.

I suppose this perception is also something that's aligned with reality. So if someone mistakenly calls some other person or country psychopath, their views will not be included into the Cs' calculations.
 
thisplacerocks said:
My take on the definition of psychopath in this session is someone who is perceived correctly to be a psychopath.
Click to expand...
I think you should read up on the subject a bit more. Psychopathy has nothing to do with how an individual is perceived, but rather their inherent nature. A psychopath sitting alone on a cold rock in the voids of intergalactic space without nobody around for a billion light years would still be a psychopath. Even and especially regardless of how they perceive themselves.
 
Ryan said:
I think you should read up on the subject a bit more. Psychopathy has nothing to do with how an individual is perceived, but rather their inherent nature. A psychopath sitting alone on a cold rock in the voids of intergalactic space without nobody around for a billion light years would still be a psychopath. Even and especially regardless of how they perceive themselves.
Click to expand...
Except that by definition a psychopath doesn’t know he or she is a psychopath. A sociopath may however.
 
Ryan said:
You need to check your definitions. Lobaczewski says that psychopaths are well aware of what they are, to the point they can easily recognise others of their kind.
Click to expand...
Perhaps. Psychopathy is defined more or less as a lack of remorse for your (mostly narcissistic) actions. And while they could lack remorse as a genetic or other trait, I take it to mean that they don’t know (or care) that their actions are harmful or wrong. A sociopath, on the other hand, knows their actions are innately wrong but do them anyway.
 
CluelessIn3D said:
And while they could lack remorse as a genetic or other trait, I take it to mean that they don’t know (or care) that their actions are harmful or wrong. A sociopath, on the other hand, knows their actions are innately wrong but do them anyway.
Click to expand...
You're making an assumption here. Just because psychopaths lack remorse doesn't meant they don't know that their actions are harmful or wrong. That's anthropomorphising psychopaths with normal human traits: "Well, if they did something bad they must not have done it intentionally." You also then assume that psychopaths don't do those things, but sociopaths do!

Your perspective is naive, confused, and shows a lack of understanding of the topic. I suggest reading Cleckley, Hare, Lobaczewski, Stout, Samenow and some of the other recommended books on psychopathy and sociopathy in order to form a proper understanding of what a psychopath is, and the actual differences between them and sociopaths.
 
Ryan,

I find it Interesting that you chose an ad hominem attack instead of restating your own belief. It does nothing to support your statement.

And perhaps that what I should have said, instead of them not “knowing” their actions are “wrong“ by societal standards, was they simply don’t believe them to be.

Good day.
 
Psychopaths know that they are different from the rest of us. They can spot each other. They practice the emotions they see the rest of us going through so they can imitate them to those who are their targets to make their targets think that they are like us. They have no remorse nor empathy nor conscience. They do have the emotion of anger. They see nothing wrong with doing whatever they have to to get what they want. They don't really care about the consequences of their actions. And on and on.....

If you want to learn about psychopaths, it would be good to read some of the books recommended by Ryan:
Ryan said:
Your perspective is naive, confused, and shows a lack of understanding of the topic. I suggest reading Cleckley, Hare, Lobaczewski, Stout, Samenow and some of the other recommended books on psychopathy and sociopathy in order to form a proper understanding of what a psychopath is, and the actual differences between them and sociopaths.
Click to expand...
These are all excellent books covering the subject and quite informative.

Oh, also, we don't really dwell too much in "beliefs" of something but rather the facts of something. We are a research forum after all. ;-)
 
CluelessIn3D said:
Ryan,

I find it Interesting that you chose an ad hominem attack instead of restating your own belief. It does nothing to support your statement.
Click to expand...
Dear Clueless in 3D,

Where in my post did I make an ad hominem attack? You seem triggered by having the gaps in your knowledge pointed out. Or you've been deliberately trying to assert the opposite of what you know to be true in order to sow lies and confusion, and are annoyed that your little game has been derailed. That's always a possibility. I suggest you cease commenting on the subject until you've done a little more reading if you want people to think the former.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom