questions

[tuberculosisinmybal]

dont think the way anyone answers actually matters in ur experiment. theyre just props ur bending to validate wtv narratives you constructed beforehand. u believe u can read everyone bc of ur self proclaimed high empathy. glam was always gna be read as an empath and schizo was always gna be a ‘sociopath’ regardless of the words they chose.
even if i pretend ur deriving your conclusions solely from the results of those 3 questions, the questions r shallow and flawed. in dms, u told me an empath can never be manipulated. here ur saying its also impossible for them to manipulate, unless to help someone else.
what would happen when 2 empaths attempt to manipulate each other, both for a ‘helpful’ purpose? and who do u think gets to deem it helpful?
manipulator decides:
they can justify any manipulation
ex. “i lied to them for their own good, it was to protect them” (u have done this one to me) meaning every harmful action becomes morally pure by default
victim decides:
as soon as they say the manipulator didnt do any good, the “helpful” part is invalidated, making it just plain manipulation and going against ur rule.

since both ppl are both manipulating and being manipulated, someone is still wronged and someone is still acting selfishly.
ur scenario forces one empath to be:
manipulable (contradiction)
or
manipulative in a malicious way (contradiction)

everything uve been saying is nothing but self serving fan fiction, and labeling urself as an empath under these rules would mean giving urself immunity to any manipulation and simultaneously claiming a moral pass to manipulate as you please, meaning no matter the situation or outcome, u would be able to stay morally clean in every single scenario. very bold claim

High IQ ahh answer

 

[Deleted Member 84302]

High IQ ahh answer

not in the slightest i expected better from her

 

[nana]

not in the slightest i expected better from her

what would u disagree with?

 

[Deleted Member 84302]

what would u disagree with?

everything

 

[nana]

everything

what r the flaws in my argument though? it wasnt a personal attack i was just debating the way you defined empathy

 

[Deleted Member 84302]

what r the flaws in my argument though? it wasnt a personal attack i was just debating the way you defined empathy

except it was a personal attack so you can spot your own flaws

 

[FaceIQ]

1) what is empathy for you
2) do you think empathetic people are easily manipulated
3) do you think empathetic people are emotional

welcome to my new hyperfixation, manipulation
you can tell if someone is empathetic with these questions too if that interests you idiots

Empathy is the ability to grasp another person’s emotional state with precision

They can be manipulated if empathy overrides boundaries not because of empathy itself

They’re perceptive, not necessarily emotional

 

[nana]

except it was a personal attack so you can spot your own flaws

well i read what i said, im not sure if id say its flawless but its definitely not entirely flawed. im asking you why you think it is. and no it isnt a personal attack, im giving you my honest blunt thoughts. i thought ud understand since u communicate similarly

 

[Ghoultune]

1) what is empathy for you
2) do you think empathetic people are easily manipulated
3) do you think empathetic people are emotional

1. To feel what people are going through and shit Idk
2. No
3. Yeah not a bad thing

 

[Jawggernaut Mewlord]

1) what is empathy for you
2) do you think empathetic people are easily manipulated
3) do you think empathetic people are emotional

Understanding others' emotions
Yes
Yes

 

[Deleted Member 84302]

well i read what i said, im not sure if id say its flawless but its definitely not entirely flawed. im asking you why you think it is. and no it isnt a personal attack, im giving you my honest blunt thoughts. i thought ud understand since u communicate similarly

I want to debunk it but its a poor debate disguised as a personal attack so i can't do it anymore, do what you want hannah you aren't dumb

 

[nana]

I want to debunk it but its a poor debate disguised as a personal attack so i can't do it anymore, do what you want hannah you aren't dumb

u never started doing anything in the first place, idk why ur speaking like ur fed up. this post is literally inviting ppl to respond with their viewpoints. i laid out my thoughts, and as soon as u read it u dismiss them and go to send me vague messages to signal that youre upset w me. then u dislike it and say nothing. u didnt attempt to explain, or argue, or ask me to elaborate. and now when i directly ask u to point out the flaws u avoid that as well.

 

[Deleted Member 84302]

u never started doing anything in the first place, idk why ur speaking like ur fed up.

because im not a fan of passive aggressiveness especially to people i really value. im treating people how they treat me.

this post is literally inviting ppl to respond with their viewpoints.

yeah, viewpoints not personal attacks.

i laid out my thoughts, and as soon as u read it u dismiss them and go to send me vague messages to signal that youre upset w me.

don't bring your own personal business in public, i won't do this. i didnt dismiss shit

then u dislike it and say nothing.

deserved a dislike, I dont agree with you

u didnt attempt to explain, or argue, or ask me to elaborate. and now when i directly ask u to point out the flaws u avoid that as well.

the flaw is that it is a personal attack
"theyre just props ur bending to validate wtv narratives you constructed beforehand"
like what is this? its an attack from the first sentence, i just didnt expect you to attack me

 

[nana]

because im not a fan of passive aggressiveness especially to people i really value. im treating people how they treat me.

yeah, viewpoints not personal attacks.

don't bring your own personal business in public, i won't do this. i didnt dismiss shit

deserved a dislike, I dont agree with you

the flaw is that it is a personal attack
"theyre just props ur bending to validate wtv narratives you constructed beforehand"
like what is this? its an attack from the first sentence, i just didnt expect you to attack me

you cant talk about personal business or personal attacks when ur the only one who made this personal? all i did was debate what youve been saying, and you react by ignoring it, then indirectly calling it unintelligent, then directly calling it flawed, and then acting like im being cruel when i ask u to explain why u think that. u taking things personally does not make it a personal attack, multiple ppl argued against u in this thread and u entertained it

 

[Deleted Member 84302]

you cant talk about personal business or personal attacks when ur the only one who made this personal? all i did was debate what youve been saying, and you react by ignoring it, then indirectly calling it unintelligent, then directly calling it flawed, and then acting like im being cruel when i ask u to explain why u think that. u taking things personally does not make it a personal attack, multiple ppl argued against u in this thread and u entertained it

"everything uve been saying is nothing but self serving fan fiction"

 

[tmomo]

1) what is empathy for you
2) do you think empathetic people are easily manipulated
3) do you think empathetic people are emotional

welcome to my new hyperfixation, manipulation
you can tell if someone is empathetic with these questions too if that interests you idiots

1. empathy to me is relating my experiences to someone elses circumstances and using that to understand how they feel… does that make sense…

2. i do think more empathetic and emotional people are prone to getting manipulated and taken advantage of because empathetic people also tend to have people pleasing traits i feel like

3. Yes emotional but not in a dramaqueen way , just in a deep and understanding way

 

[nana]

"everything uve been saying is nothing but self serving fan fiction"

ur not disproving or debunking anything, ur just pointing out the small parts that can be taken as insulting. havent said anything to prove im wrong though, so dont respond to ppl saying my response “wasnt intelligent” if u cant explain why or even debate it

 

[Deleted Member 84302]

ur not disproving or debunking anything, ur just pointing out the small parts that can be taken as insulting. havent said anything to prove im wrong though, so dont respond to ppl saying my response “wasnt intelligent” if u cant explain why or even debate it

was meant to be insulting but ok

dont think the way anyone answers actually matters in ur experiment. theyre just props ur bending to validate wtv narratives you constructed beforehand. u believe u can read everyone bc of ur self proclaimed high empathy. glam was always gna be read as an empath and schizo was always gna be a ‘sociopath’ regardless of the words they chose.

no they were not, i don't know why you think i have this narrative when what i am doing is asking questions, i only said if the response is high or low empathy to garner traction, schizo is a diagnosed sociopath so no need to use quotation marks and his answer proves it anyways

ASPD individuals usually see empathy as a weakness and people and their feelings as tools, asking them about empathy is one of the best indicators to tell if someone has ASPD traits. this is a known fact, not some narrative I make. glam is an empathetic person because of his response, lexi is an empathetic person because of her response it is simple as that. someone who is empathetic will find feelings a burden usually and a lot of other things but you don't care about

even if i pretend ur deriving your conclusions solely from the results of those 3 questions, the questions r shallow and flawed.

they are not shallow and flawed, why would they be.

in dms, u told me an empath can never be manipulated.

pretty much because they can see past bullshit. obviously a skilled manipulator can manipulate anyone but it will be harder

here ur saying its also impossible for them to manipulate, unless to help someone else.

and? how does this relate to our dms.

what would happen when 2 empaths attempt to manipulate each other, both for a ‘helpful’ purpose? and who do u think gets to deem it helpful?
manipulator decides:
they can justify any manipulation
ex. “i lied to them for their own good, it was to protect them” (u have done this one to me) meaning every harmful action becomes morally pure by default

this reeks of passive aggressiveness because you are calling me a manipulator while completely forgetting the context of everything that happened. but anyways two empaths would probably not manipulate each other. and bringing morals into it makes no sense these are extremely specific situations

victim decides:
as soon as they say the manipulator didnt do any good, the “helpful” part is invalidated, making it just plain manipulation and going against ur rule.

since both ppl are both manipulating and being manipulated, someone is still wronged and someone is still acting selfishly.
ur scenario forces one empath to be:
manipulable (contradiction)
or
manipulative in a malicious way (contradiction)

this is not my scenario, this is YOUR scenario thank you very much. anyways empathetic people are rarely manipulative if they are, it would be a shitshow and they would know they are actively causing harm on someone, they would be the stereotypical manipulator.

everything uve been saying is nothing but self serving fan fiction and labeling urself as an empath under these rules would mean giving urself immunity to any manipulation and simultaneously claiming a moral pass to manipulate as you please, meaning no matter the situation or outcome, u would be able to stay morally clean in every single scenario. very bold claim

this is targeted but i don't know why nor do i fucking care anymore. if someone tells me something that i know isn't true because i know who i am, then i won't care. i know myself best and i know my "fan fiction" better

 

[Deleted Member 84302]

ur not disproving or debunking anything, ur just pointing out the small parts that can be taken as insulting. havent said anything to prove im wrong though, so dont respond to ppl saying my response “wasnt intelligent” if u cant explain why or even debate it

anyways it was nearly impossible to debunk something extremely emotionally charged and passive aggressive which is why i didnt at first

 

[Gengar]

1) what is empathy for you

The ability to place yourself in someone else’s shoes without having had the same experience as them.

2) do you think empathetic people are easily manipulated

Yes. Empathetic people want to help, and are willing to go to any extent to achieve this. Others can exploit that.

3) do you think empathetic people are emotional

By nature, they are. More than anyone else.

 

[nana]

was meant to be insulting but ok

no they were not, i don't know why you think i have this narrative when what i am doing is asking questions, i only said if the response is high or low empathy to garner traction, schizo is a diagnosed sociopath so no need to use quotation marks and his answer proves it anyways

when i say u have a narrative, i mean u already know the ppl answering. u already have opinions on them. ur labels rnt coming from their answers, their answers are being judged based on how u already decided to read ppl before they wrote anyth, and since u stated u believe u can read people with high accuracy, their answers wont make your predetermined outcomes waver bc u have strong confidence in ur people reading abilities.
“schizo is a diagnosed sociopath so no need to use quotation marks and his answer proves it anyways” PROVES that u had a label for him before he answered your questions. that is by definition a narrative. if ur gonna go label ppl ur system needs a structure that can factor in cultural and personality differences in expression, sarcasm, trauma responses, blatant lying, etc

ASPD individuals usually see empathy as a weakness and people and their feelings as tools, asking them about empathy is one of the best indicators to tell if someone has ASPD traits. this is a known fact, not some narrative I make.

a detached way of expression has many explanations that i already said. if there are multiple interpretations that exist and u only pick the one that fits your belief, that is confirmation bias by definition.

glam is an empathetic person because of his response, lexi is an empathetic person because of her response it is simple as that. someone who is empathetic will find feelings a burden usually and a lot of other things but you don't care about

u agreed in the replies that empathy is often performative and is typ shown in actions rather than words, then u proceed to use a method that can only measure performance and claim ur measuring empathy. and if u say u can tell bc of their external actions outside of this experiment, that proves you DO have a narrative and this is not neutral analysis. and empathy presents itself in people in many different ways, u cant make the personal preference of burden a universal rule

they are not shallow and flawed, why would they be.

maybe bc of the reasons i stated clearly

pretty much because they can see past bullshit. obviously a skilled manipulator can manipulate anyone but it will be harder

if now ur saying manipulation is possible, then ur original claim that an empathetic person can “never be manipulated” was flawed, like i said? u cant change the rule mid argument and turn an absolute claim to a degree claim and pretend thats not a completely different rule from ur original one.

and? how does this relate to our dms.

thats where u stated that “empaths can never be manipulated”, which is relevant because it means uve now claimed its impossible for an empathetic person manipulative unless to help someone but they can also never be manipulated, which is proven wrong w the 2 empath paradox i gave u. u still havent explained how those claims can logically coexist

this reeks of passive aggressiveness because you are calling me a manipulator while completely forgetting the context of everything that happened.

i never called u a manipulator and im not discussing personal events, its a hypothetical paradox that questions the structure of your overall claim, so im not sure what context ur talking about. regardless, if ur claim is valid it should hold regardless of the context or the people involved.

but anyways two empaths would probably not manipulate each other.

according to what? u cant assert a conclusion using the very rule we’re currently disputing. empath vs empath is a probable and legitimate real life scenario that would test ur rule’s validity

and bringing morals into it makes no sense

u introduced morality when you said empathic manipulation is possible if “to help someone”. if morality is part of your rule it has to be defined. u still havent touched who decides what “helpful manipulation” is.

these are extremely specific situations

like i said they really arent, theyre irl scenarios that can and will happen. rl isnt simple, and if ur rule falls apart as soon as a scenario is slightly complicated then its wrong

this is not my scenario, this is YOUR scenario thank you very much.

its ur scenario if it follows the rules and claims that u made

anyways empathetic people are rarely manipulative

just shifted it from impossible to unlikely

if they are, it would be a shitshow and they would know they are actively causing harm on someone, they would be the stereotypical manipulator.

ok so if they would be a stereotypical manipulator it proves that it is possible for an empath to be manipulative….which goes against what u claimed….
and their intentions are completely separate from the outcome, they can actively cause harm to someone while thinking theyre genuinely helping. you still havent defined who decides if their action is deemed helpful, and if the label depends on the manipulators intention alone then the system allows harmful actions to become morally pure by default…like i said.

this is targeted but i don't know why nor do i fucking care anymore.

nothing i said was about u as a person, im not debating who u r or whether ur empathetic. ik better than to make assumptions on people. im questioning the claims uve made and nothing more, this has nothing to do with ur personal identity so do not claim victimhood

if someone tells me something that i know isn't true because i know who i am, then i won't care. i know myself best and i know my "fan fiction" better

not ab protecting ur ego or whether u feel insulted, i never touched on ur identity. im questioning whether ur judgement on others follows a consistent structure, which it doesnt. im questioning whether ur claims are logically possible, which theyre not. saying an empath cant be manipulative or manipulable means giving them both a moral pass and immunity which is dehumanizing, nonsensical, and impossible. TLDR fan fiction

 

[tuberculosisinmybal]

I want to debunk it but its a poor debate disguised as a personal attack so i can't do it anymore, do what you want hannah you aren't dumb

You can't say it's a personal attack and then not debate it after opening a debate post about empathy what the helly

 

[Schizotypalcel]

schizo is a diagnosed sociopath

Believe it or not, i got undiagnosed.
I have higher empathy levels then most but i had complications being empathetic, i just never stated it openly because it's irrelevant cause i'm more then a diagnosis.

 

[Deleted Member 84302]

Believe it or not, i got undiagnosed.
I have higher empathy levels then most but i had complications being empathetic, i just never stated it openly because it's irrelevant cause i'm more then a diagnosis.

what kind of complications

 

[Schizotypalcel]

what kind of complications

Personal