The military doesn't give everyone a psych eval.

Anyone seeking a higher clearance goes through one. But that's not a full accounting, the vast majority of people never need a clearance beyond the general Secret that almost everyone gets. No real psych eval for that.

Some specialized jobs get them as well. And I think some combat jobs get them by default... but mostly no. It's just the standard, "can this person both follow orders and be trusted to do the job they were hired for?"

I am a detractor who read these sources. You can too if you have any interest in the subject.

The first one does not mention statistics at all, just describes why you shouldn't call people narcisistits because it has a specific definition that is overly applied. Ironically enough.

The second source does mention some statistics. But actually verifies the questions that were raised by other curious folks. It states that only .5 percent of the population experiences NPD and that 20 percent of the military does.

This verifies that the military survey is NOT the only source of statistics and that 20 percent of every one you meet doesn't necessarily "lack empathy".

So, a relief, I suppose, for now.

Although, the claim that anyone who questions a random internet comment are all the same person and are definitely controlling narcissistic a holes has not been verified.

But it's probably true. I will not look any further into it for fear of self reflection. 

The only caveat is that people who want to be soldiers aren't necessarily representative of the general population. Plenty of people join the military because they want to kill people.

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the number is around 20% of those who enlist.

20% of people outright lacking empathy is a lot. With such a large percentage, how can you be sure you aren't one of them?

Yesterday I helped to clarify why AIPAC fucked up in the NJ special election. When my response was followed with the joke "Ah, thank you for not explaining that while literally walking out the d", it started collecting downvotes. The "not explaining" seemed to stand out as negative, and I admit I was a little confused myself. However, instead of throwing shade or downvoting it myself, I just asked a simple question about what they meant. The response: "(I was walking out the door, like the author while writing the article)" put everything to rest. It was a joke about how the author of the posted article trailed off without coming to a clear conclusion.

Yet even after this clarification was posted, you jumped in with the worst negative assumption about the interaction. You weren't seeking clarity or offering anyone support, you were looking to attack. Even after being respectfully asked to re-read the conversation, you double and tripled-down on this incorrect negative assumption. I feel that this attitude is evident here, as you challenge your "detractors" and charge that they are the ones lacking empathy. Don't forget that every accusation is a confession.

Ultimately, I don't agree with your 20% statistic. Mostly this is because I don't believe in binary assignments, such as having or lacking empathy. We are all capable of making positive assumptions about each other's intentions. Some of us just choose not to in certain circumstances, but there is always room for change.

The only place to get an accurate number on this thing you should totally believe about everyone you meet is a test that the military definitely doesn't give to everyone but can maybe be sourced probably.