Sender <> Receiver <> Observer
> Sociopaths don’t follow the rules of authenticity or of shared humanity.
This theory sounds great and all, have we considered the alternative for the Clueless and Losers as well? https://alexdanco.com/2021/01/22/the-michael-scott-theory-of-social-class/
Possibility:
Clueless are not authentic with the shared imaginary humanity, as they are constantly posturing ("virtue signaling" and "dogwhistle").
Losers are authentic, but has no shared humanity as they are socially apathetic, without a bigger picture.
In Truth, only people who are "outside the system" can be both.
I mean -- I'm describing Lacanian theory. Other theories may well be useful and may explain situations equally well.
I meant as if there are people who aren't in the same mode of communication, but are just as messed up. They might be engaging in alternative discourses.
Oh, I see now what you meant, contrasting sociopaths with clueless and losers -- my mistake! I'll think on this, it's an interesting angle.
> Sociopaths don’t follow the rules of authenticity or of shared humanity.
This theory sounds great and all, have we considered the alternative for the Clueless and Losers as well? https://alexdanco.com/2021/01/22/the-michael-scott-theory-of-social-class/
Possibility:
Clueless are not authentic with the shared imaginary humanity, as they are constantly posturing ("virtue signaling" and "dogwhistle").
Losers are authentic, but has no shared humanity as they are socially apathetic, without a bigger picture.
In Truth, only people who are "outside the system" can be both.
I mean -- I'm describing Lacanian theory. Other theories may well be useful and may explain situations equally well.
I meant as if there are people who aren't in the same mode of communication, but are just as messed up. They might be engaging in alternative discourses.
Oh, I see now what you meant, contrasting sociopaths with clueless and losers -- my mistake! I'll think on this, it's an interesting angle.