all 17 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] 19 points 7 months ago (1 child)

That's a sociopath but they'll probably wear that as a badge of honor. Call them weak instead, clearly they can't handle the strain of basic human emotion.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [โ€“] 12 points 7 months ago (3 children)
  • [โ€“] 4 points 7 months ago
    [โ€“] 4 points 7 months ago

    Someone I don't want to associate with.

  • source
  • [โ€“] 3 points 7 months ago

    bigot: a narrow-minded person who obstinately adheres to their own opinions and prejudices

    especially: one who strongly and unfairly dislikes or feels hatred toward others based on their group membership

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot

  • source
  • This is somebody who bends over backwards to support a single idea: humans can do no wrong. It's not fascism because it doesn't sound like there's any side-taking or specific ideology they favor over others. They might be a flavor of anarchist?

    The lack of empathy leads me to think that the ideology was built one selfish brick at a time. It's a response to the world, not a governance of it. They want zero responsibilities derived from the actions of others. To a degree, they may have a point: inaction is allowance. If you don't stop something from happening, you're allowing it but it's lacking a lot of nuance. If you accept it as it is, there's no room for obligation. That's freeing which is probably their end goal. Not a good society, but a simple escape from responsibilities.

    It's a self-serving ideology.

  • source
  • [โ€“] 2 points 7 months ago*

    I can't diagnose them obviously, but they could potentially have a personality disorder like anti-social personality disorder (ie sociopathy or psycopathy) or narcisistic personality disorder. If they literally can't experience empathy for others or see outside of their perspective, it might be a condition like that.

    If they are capable of empathy and compassion but choose to reject it, you could call them "amoral", or a "moral nihilist".

  • source
  • [โ€“] 2 points 7 months ago

    Empathy for others should be a legal requirement

  • source
  • [โ€“] 1 point 7 months ago

    Many 'types' of people show lack of empathy and callousness and are abrasive. Types don't matter, calling them out on those matters even less. Traits are helpful though and I'd stick with those as a shield to help yourself in understanding and processing why it is that a person makes you feel that way.

  • source