People with antagonistic and selfish traits often express their hostility through rigid, authoritarian political beliefs. A new psychological study suggests that strict adherence to rules provides a socially acceptable way for these individuals to assert control over others.
  • Rimu@piefed.socialEnglish
    23·
    4 days ago

    [They] use disciplined rule-following and punitive authoritarian beliefs as a socially acceptable way to express their hostility.

  • WesternInfidels@feddit.onlineEnglish
    194·
    4 days ago

    Maybe we should talk about “defective personalities” or “weak personalities” or “malformed personalities” or something else that sounds less cool to some people than “dark personalities.”

    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      7·
      4 days ago

      ‘Power Tripping Bastard/Bitch’

      ‘Fascist Personality Disorder’

      ‘Manipulative Egomaniacal Bully’

      ‘Malignant Sociopath’

      • WesternInfidels@feddit.onlineEnglish
        82·
        4 days ago

        Okay but it says:

        It is past time to abandon the term “dark” as a descriptor of antagonistic traits

        And this is exactly what I’m suggesting, even if I’m approaching from another angle.

        Here’s more:

        4 Reasons to Ditch the “Dark Triad” Label

        Reason 2: Sensationalism

        It is true many people love a murder mystery, especially one featuring a seemingly incorrigible protagonist. It’s also true that people are drawn to seemingly charismatic leaders who seem convinced of their own glory, often using this outward charm to advance their own nefarious ends. But these aren’t reasons, the VCU-led research team says, for psychology to dignify the dark triad concept with an attention-grabbing label.

        Unbelievably, titles of published articles in the psychology literature will often adopt wording that seems more appropriate for a TV show or horror film: “The Making of Darth Vader…”, “Creatures of the Night,” and “Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire.”

          • WesternInfidels@feddit.onlineEnglish
            52·
            4 days ago

            I honestly don’t understand how you think that’s any kind of parallel.

            I think “dark” is a problematic word, it’s sensational and attractive to exactly the wrong people, I think we should use another term.

            As you point out, the psychology community has been contemplating a similar conclusion. Starting before me, I wager.

            Somehow, this makes me a moron, though.

              • WesternInfidels@feddit.onlineEnglish
                41·
                4 days ago

                I think the psychology community is probably mistaken, outdated, or out of touch on the “stigmatizing” point. The TESCREAL assholes love to think of themselves as “dark triad” or “dark personality,” they fantasize about bringing about a “dark enlightenment.” “Dark” isn’t stigmatizing, it’s cool. It’s sensational. For that reason, I think it would be great to have a different term. One that wasn’t cool.

                (A little aside here: You think the psychologists should be trusted to choose the most appropriate terms, yes? Where did the current “dark” terminology, which is apparently so problematic, come from? I don’t actually know the answer. Do you?)

                So my suggestion was specifically to find a term that wasn’t cool like “dark” is. My focus wasn’t on avoiding stigma, because I don’t care if the sorts of people who would be happy to put me and my family in a concentration camp felt stigmatized. But hey, if you want to stick up for their feelings and dignity, you go ahead. You’re still free to do that. You will always be free to stick up for them.

                So you don’t like “defective.” Okay. Maybe “antagonistic” would work.

                I am very smart, and frankly, anyone who says my idea is obviously fucking stupid is contradicting the psychology community

                The contrast you think you see is there because you’re not absorbing my point. Maybe that’s partly my fault. I think it’s partly your fault, though. You’ve charged into this with a chip on your shoulder.

                whose opinions on this I’m literally just now glancing at

                Yup! Is that a scientific argument, though? Should it matter if I’m an expert or not?

  • misk@piefed.socialEnglish
    71·
    4 days ago

    Both personality traits and political views in this study were self reported. Intuition seems right but that’s not a great way to measure it.

    • akwd169@sh.itjust.works
      3·
      3 days ago

      Its psypost they are a fucking trash blog spreading confirmation bias and misinformation because they always bury the important details like sample size, population characteristics, methodology, meanwhile their entire post reads like its been proven by science to the layman.

      Most often its something like n=50, population: students in Huebei province China, method: online survey…

      Headline: Men are more dominant and possessive while women are more caring and promote freedom of choice, study finds!!!

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
    93·
    4 days ago

    authoritarianism

    More an invective than a material critique. You never seem to see a party or governor critique authoritarianism when they’re in power.

    At best, you get a Reagan-esque figure mouthing Ayn Rand libertarianism while doing Christian Fascism via espionage and private back channels.

    At worst, you get ethnic cleansing on the grounds that the people you’re massacring are genetically incapable of free-thinking.