# Is testing really all that bad?



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

'Tis a curious thing, I always hear folks say tests in relationships are bad yadda yadda...

Yet erm... how does one allow others the ability to earn trust without giving them the opportunity to betray? Like, just leave a few crumbs for them to snatch at when they think you're not looking and boom, you caught a rat before it has a chance to intrude further into your life. Aka... testing. If they don't take the crumbs, when they could, it could mean either they are more cunning or more trustworthy, and other factors can then come into play to determine which of the two is more likely possible.

Is this dishonest? It's not lying, why is it dishonest?


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Depends on what is meant by "tests". Most people believe that police entrapment is a bad idea because presenting someone with a very good opportunity to do wrong is a test that many otherwise honest people will fail.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

Personally if I was ever to feel that I had to test a partners fidelity, then it would mean there were already red flags. IOW no relationship worth having.


----------



## haveandhold (Jan 15, 2018)

RandomDude said:


> 'Tis a curious thing, I always hear folks say tests in relationships are bad yadda yadda...
> 
> Yet erm... how does one allow others the ability to earn trust without giving them the opportunity to betray? Like, just leave a few crumbs for them to snatch at when they think you're not looking and boom, you caught a rat before it has a chance to intrude further into your life. Aka... testing. If they don't take the crumbs, when they could, it could mean either they are more cunning or more trustworthy, and other factors can then come into play to determine which of the two is more likely possible.
> 
> Is this dishonest? It's not lying, why is it dishonest?


What type of "test" did you have in mind?


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Well, it's for people in general, not specifically a spouse. Like, when I don't know someone that well, I normally give them an opportunity to use something against me or others, except it's always a trap.

There are other ways to earn trust, such as consistency, ultimately it's not about who I trust it's what I trust them to do, but even consistent behavior with consistent circumstances is at best, unproven trust, and I found it's not as reliable as trust forged when someone had the power to do something against you, but chose not to. But such trust I found, can only be proven through tests.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

OK I get it. For me I have no need for such tests or games having been blessed with an excellent ability to read people. There is a vibe some people give off that keeps me away from them and it has always served me well.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

K- so if I'm a self- proclaimed sociopath-
I'm pretty sure any "test" results would be skewed in favor of me finding my next victim.


So test away,Dude.

For what match?


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Intuition is useful, but I like it backed up, like when I get a bad vibe, it helps when I test them, and in certain circumstances it provides me with material to use against them, which I do, and even rally others against them, which is impossible without actual material; something they have done to earn the mistrust.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

RandomDude said:


> Intuition is useful, but I like it backed up, like when I get a bad vibe, it helps when I test them, and in certain circumstances it provides me with material to use against them, which I do, and even rally others against them, which is impossible without actual material; something they have done to earn the mistrust.


Sorry RD, seems like a complicated way to live life.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

MrsHolland said:


> Sorry RD, seems like a complicated way to live life.


Is it? Seems simple for me. So why is it wrong? 'Tis a curious thing...

I live a happy life, I add/remove people as I see fit, and right now, it's 90% bliss. Just 5% still in the process of removal, these things take time, and the other 5%, meh, minor annoyances.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

You rock, Random.

You got the whole menu in order.

We bow to your awesomeness.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Why the sarcasm? Speak straight.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

RandomDude said:


> Why the sarcasm? Speak straight.


Okay- I'll speak straight per your request.

There are how many billions of females on the planet?

Your awesomeness can find you at least 2 as in two females that fit your criteria,.

They are not posting on TAM. 

Right?

And I'm not quite sure why the posters on TAM need the various ways of reminding- how firikkin awesome you are.

Movie star looks, rich, smart, sociopathic in a good way, father of the year, sexy, tall, fit, rich, tall, fit , handsome like a movie star, forgot handsome....


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

sandcastle said:


> Okay- I'll speak straight per your request.
> 
> There are how many billions of females on the planet?
> 
> ...


Errr... ok...

You know I'm only joking about my 'awesomeness' in some of my posts, I use a  smiley to indicate I'm just fooling around. 

Don't take me so seriously lol
Kinda funny that you do however


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

RandomDude said:


> Errr... ok...
> 
> You know I'm only joking about my 'awesomeness' in some of my posts, I use a  smiley to indicate I'm just fooling around.
> 
> ...


No ,you are not joking...

You are self- proclaimed ASPD and probably NPD-
Co- morbid

I bet you told your spouse AFTER you cut her to shreds-

"I'm just joking, get a sense of humour"


You can emoji all day long- you said it- own it.

Random Dude- you actually ARE random.

Scary thought. There are billions of Random Dudes and nothing makes you more special than them.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

sandcastle said:


> Random Dude- you actually ARE random.
> 
> Scary thought. There are billions of Random Dudes and nothing makes you more special than them.


Of course I am, what makes you think I am otherwise? I picked this name for a reason 



> No ,you are not joking...
> 
> You are self- proclaimed ASPD and probably NPD-
> Co- morbid


Ah! Titles that people give to those they fail to understand. 

Even the psychiatric community acknowledges the problems with the labels as was discussed in one of my threads.

And yes, I do joke around. Life would be boring otherwise. Boredom is the devil's workshop correct?



> I bet you told your spouse AFTER you cut her to shreds-
> 
> "I'm just joking, get a sense of humour"
> 
> You can emoji all day long- you said it- own it.


Actually, I don't cut people to shreds unless they require it. 

Ex-wife and I are in good relations, co-parents after all, and ex-girlfriend and I are still friends. So, not sure what you're on about.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

RandomDude said:


> Of course I am, what makes you think I am otherwise? I picked this name for a reason
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And YOU get to decide who "requires" being cut to shreds.


Carry on.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

sandcastle said:


> And YOU get to decide who "requires" being cut to shreds.
> 
> 
> Carry on.


Of course. Don't we all? Unless you follow someone else's ideals; aka religion. Not everyone has the luxury of being able to be a lemming.

Now in the context of the thread; We live in a hostile world sandcastle, too many times I see good people being taken advantage of, they trust so easily, freely, foolishly, and then they suffer for it. Weakness is punished, it's just the way it is. And even if morality is relative for me, I like to believe in humanity, and rewarding betrayal, not very beneficial in the long run, logically. It's best to make them suffer for it, rather than the people they intend to betray.

So I wonder why these tests are so frowned upon, even considered complicated. I discussed some of this on one of my other threads in regards to morality and revenge, using the example of how in the case of infidelity, it's proven countless times that the cheater must suffer the consequences of their actions before any reconciliation is possible. 

You get it?


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

RandomDude said:


> Is it? Seems simple for me. So why is it wrong? 'Tis a curious thing...
> 
> I live a happy life, I add/remove people as I see fit, and right now, it's 90% bliss. Just 5% still in the process of removal, these things take time, and the other 5%, meh, minor annoyances.


Didn't say it or the way you do things is wrong RD. Just saying it would be too complicated for me, no right or wrong.

It would be decades since I felt the need to remove anyone from my life.


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> Intuition is useful, but I like it backed up, like when I get a bad vibe, it helps when I test them, and in certain circumstances it provides me with material to use against them, which I do, and even rally others against them, which is impossible without actual material; something they have done to earn the mistrust.


Your "tests" are manipulation of people with the intent to cause harm ... that is wrong.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

MrsHolland said:


> Didn't say it or the way you do things is wrong RD. Just saying it would be too complicated for me, no right or wrong.
> 
> It would be decades since I felt the need to remove anyone from my life.


You're very lucky, perhaps I just live in too big of a city where since people can easily escape consequences by disappearing into the crowd, where one has to be on guard.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Red Sonja said:


> Your "tests" are manipulation of people with the intent to cause harm ... that is wrong.


Is it wrong to harm those who betray? Isn't it more preferable for them to suffer the consequences of their actions? Do you not think that allowing them to be rewarded for it, encourages it?

Not to mention these tests lets them suffer the consequences while the consequences for you, yourself, are minimal. As I mentioned; bread crumbs.


----------



## Andy1001 (Jun 29, 2016)

Dude you seem to have a vision of yourself as some sort of demigod. You feel the need to “test” people?,wtf is that all about. 
I think people would get fed up with your bs very quickly and what you see as cutting people out of your life is actually them ignoring you.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Andy1001 said:


> Dude you seem to have a vision of yourself as some sort of demigod. You feel the need to “test” people?,wtf is that all about.
> I think people would get fed up with your bs very quickly and what you see as cutting people out of your life is actually them ignoring you.


Demigod? I can only wish! Interesting the accusation however, are you implying that the responsibility for taking a moral stance is up to a higher power alone? Not everyone can believe that, especially when others believe that there is no higher power to do so.

Why are tests so bad? The only people harmed are those with the intent to betray anyway. No collateral, unless the test itself is faulty.


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> Is it wrong to harm those who betray? Isn't it more preferable for them to suffer the consequences of their actions? Do you not think that allowing them to be rewarded for it, encourages it?
> 
> Not to mention these tests lets them suffer the consequences while the consequences for you, yourself, are minimal. As I mentioned; bread crumbs.


Who will meet out your consequences for deliberately setting a person up to fail?

People are not pawns in a chess game for you to play with.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Red Sonja said:


> Who will meet out your consequences for deliberately setting a person up to fail?


Hmmm, explain setting a person up to fail.

My understanding of that point of view, is when a test is faulty and makes the person fail yet proves nothing.

I'll give you a simple example of what I consider a test, like when you have someone over, you leave a few notes lying around, all counted. Observing carefully, you see later if the notes are missing. If they are obviously that person has stolen the money, speaks about his/her character, and one would be a fool to invite them over again.

These tests allow for filtration of not so trustworthy sorts, and allows you to have a social circle of much more respectable individuals.

Isn't that more preferable?



> People are not pawns in a chess game for you to play with.


Life, is a chess game. We can only choose which piece of the board we want to be.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

RandomDude said:


> You're very lucky, perhaps I just live in too big of a city where since people can easily escape consequences by disappearing into the crowd, where one has to be on guard.


Like YOU do.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

RandomDude said:


> Hmmm, explain setting a person up to fail.
> 
> My understanding of that point of view, is when a test is faulty and makes the person fail yet proves nothing.
> 
> ...


Life is a chess game for Cluster B's.

The rest of us un-enlightened widgets try to do the right thing because it actually FEELS good to do the right thing- ya know- like loving and caring about our partner which trickles down to our children which sends them off to school feeling safe, secure and confident. They thrive to their capabilities, they are kind to their classmates, they laugh, giggle and are excited for a new day.

That IS NOT A CHESS GAME.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

And others do the right thing because it's simply, the right thing to do. Morality and ethics is discussed to find the best solution for betterment as a whole, as black and white to us is a myth. Emotions, empathy, too fragile.

This is why I'm discussing it, arguing not to be hostile, but to challenge you, to either show me how these tests are actually bad, or to show me another solution.


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> Intuition is useful, but I like it backed up, like when I get a bad vibe, it helps when I test them, and *in certain circumstances it provides me with material to use against them, which I do, and even rally others against them, which is impossible without actual material*; something they have done to earn the mistrust.


It is wrong because the above bolded quote is your motivation and intent for your "tests". You get a "bad vibe" from a person and then set them up via a "test" and punish them ... all because of a feeling, a whim. It sounds to me like you consider yourself "above" other people and take satisfaction in hurting others whom you feel are "less than" you are.





RandomDude said:


> Life, is a chess game. We can only choose which piece of the board we want to be.


Only a person with no empathy and little or no conscience believes the above and, lives their life based on that belief.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Red Sonja said:


> It is wrong because the above bolded quote is your motivation and intent for your "tests". You get a "bad vibe" from a person and then set them up via a "test" and punish them ... all because of a feeling, a whim. It sounds to me like you consider yourself "above" other people and take satisfaction in hurting others whom you feel are "less than" you are.


Well, if I don't, it's likely to be done to me. And they only suffer the consequences if they prove my intuition correct. Do I enjoy it? Sure, is it wrong to enjoy when justice is delivered?

Why is it wrong when there is no collateral?



> Only a person with no empathy and little or no conscience believes the above and, lives their life based on that belief.


Careful, I might start shooting lightning! If only you knew the power of the dark side!


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> Well, if I don't, it's likely to be done to me. And they only suffer the consequences if they prove my intuition correct. Do I enjoy it? Sure, is it wrong to enjoy when justice is delivered?


I cannot explain it in a way you will understand or agree with because we have diametrically opposed value systems. My value system is based on the value of human life, yours is not.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Red Sonja said:


> I cannot explain it in a way you will understand or agree with because we have diametrically opposed value systems. My value system is based on the value of human life, yours is not.


I see, understood.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Well... I guess this is as far as I can get when it comes to answers. Not sure what I was expecting, but was hoping for a logical reason or alternate solution to allowing others to earn trust.

As for my value systems, I do value humanity as well, in my own way. Though for many it's "two wrongs don't make a right", where for me it's "give them a taste of their medicine" and "the end justifies the means", the latter referring to my belief that if folks do not ensure that those who betray suffer for their choices, then those folks are only encouraging the perpetrator to continue, like the countless cases in the infidelity section.

I don't judge either way, just, in disagreement.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

RandomDude said:


> I see, understood.


Oh for the love of God-

You are patronizing Sonja-

You ABSOLUTELY do understand everything before you post ANYTHING

You and Sam Vaknin BFF's?


----------



## Andy1001 (Jun 29, 2016)

You are going to have a very lonely life if you continue with this absurd behavior. Nobody wants to be under scrutiny and your ridiculous screening system is deeply flawed. You actually want people to fail because it feeds your victim complex. 
Check out the signs for bpd,you will find them on uptown’s page.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

RandomDude said:


> You're very lucky, perhaps I just live in too big of a city where since people can easily escape consequences by disappearing into the crowd, where one has to be on guard.


Your city is not that much bigger than where I live


----------



## toblerone (Oct 18, 2016)

did we pass the test?


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

You can trust or you can monitor, but you can't do both. 

Back when I was in school there was an "honor code". This allowed students to take closed-book exams on their own time - simply based on trust. Because they were trusted, the great majority of students were honest. If they had been monitoring us, then not being trusted, we would have seen no reason to be trustworthy. 

I would much rather be in a relationship with trust that in one with constant monitoring. If my wife wanted to track my actions, I would view that as a lack of trust, and feel that I was not betraying her if I found a way to evade her surveillance. 




RandomDude said:


> 'Tis a curious thing, I always hear folks say tests in relationships are bad yadda yadda...
> 
> Yet erm... how does one allow others the ability to earn trust without giving them the opportunity to betray? Like, just leave a few crumbs for them to snatch at when they think you're not looking and boom, you caught a rat before it has a chance to intrude further into your life. Aka... testing. If they don't take the crumbs, when they could, it could mean either they are more cunning or more trustworthy, and other factors can then come into play to determine which of the two is more likely possible.
> 
> Is this dishonest? It's not lying, why is it dishonest?


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Andy1001 said:


> You are going to have a very lonely life if you continue with this absurd behavior. Nobody wants to be under scrutiny and your ridiculous screening system is deeply flawed. You actually want people to fail because it feeds your victim complex.
> Check out the signs for bpd,you will find them on uptown’s page.


He has already been diagnosed as a sociopath (ASPD). His posts make a lot more sense when you know this first.

Which also means he isn't going to just change and "lose his victim complex" and then be happy. It doesn't work that way with PD's.


----------



## growing_weary (Jul 23, 2017)




----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

I've found that *I* don't need to test people. Life presents the issues - I just have to observe how someone handles them. So far, it has not failed to be sufficient.

I will concede that there may be specific situations where an explicit test would be useful or even necessary, such as in certain employment situations where ethical behavior is mandatory, because anything else puts the entire organization at risk. In relationships, it is seldom necessary, except perhaps when you already have a great deal of circumstantial evidence (but no proof) pointing to a problem, and need a way to confirm or dismiss it.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

I think "tests" are foolish and a waste of time. How do you design a flawless test? How do you not know you are being tested yourself? Life itself presents its share of tests. That is how you get to know if someone is worthy of your trust, not some poorly designed "test". None of us are perfect so to think we could design something better than the tests life throws at us all is a joke.
Lets use the OP's test as an example - you leave a few notes laying around and notice some of them come up missing. How do you know if they are really missing or if the other person simply collected them for you and placed them where they should be. Or worse, they decided to leave them to see if you are dumb enough to leave bigger ones laying around worth taking next time. Sure they passed your test. They didn't take the notes. And now you trust them, but the next time you leave your wallet laying around all the big bills go missing, since if you are dumb enough to leave loose bills laying around, you probably won't notice any missing bills later on.
This concept of meting out justice is just as flawed. It does speak to a God-complex. I don't have time to play such games with people and if I ran across someone who felt the need to play games I would cut them out of my life, I could not care any less if they decided the same to me.


----------



## Maxwedge 413 (Apr 16, 2014)

What if your guest slipped an extra bill into your stack? What if you didn't catch it? Now they have something on you. And you may need to be dealt with.

Just because you're not paranoid, doesn't mean they're not watching you. 

I think that you have failed this test RD. Everyone that was introduced to you through this thread, myself included, has formed an opinion of you that likely won't be changed. And they will carry that every time they read any other thread of yours. You have armed them against seeing your point(s). 

For the record I don't think your good or bad. I think you just think and possibly behave in an odd manner, and it isn't one that would work for me.


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

RD, you crack me up. Anyway, carry on.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

It's a shame really, yet great that I decided to come out of the closet now where the consequences of being honest in regards to my diagnosis is much less than if I came out of the closet in real life. Really proves why it's best for others with PDs to deal with their issues in private, as I expected.

You now see nothing but the labels that society relies on, labels that even the psychiatric community reject, yet use due to the insistence of courts and insurance companies. All ability to empathise is gone, no different from my own empathy switch. It's very interesting, and sociology is a constant study.

And as with any other group of individuals, no two sociopaths are the same. If I have a victim complex and deliberately set people up to fail, how is it that so many has passed, with a trust that is proven, strong, and lasting. If my ways are as useless as you guys believe, why is it that I no longer suffer betrayal that so many others do? Much of what I am accused of here on this thread doesn't apply to me.



Married but Happy said:


> I've found that *I* don't need to test people. Life presents the issues - I just have to observe how someone handles them. So far, it has not failed to be sufficient.
> 
> I will concede that there may be specific situations where an explicit test would be useful or even necessary, such as in certain employment situations where ethical behavior is mandatory, because anything else puts the entire organization at risk. In relationships, it is seldom necessary, except perhaps when you already have a great deal of circumstantial evidence (but no proof) pointing to a problem, and need a way to confirm or dismiss it.


True, yet many times, when you wait for life to present the issue, the betrayal would cost more than if the trust was tested sooner, and wisely invested elsewhere.



uhtred said:


> You can trust or you can monitor, but you can't do both.
> 
> Back when I was in school there was an "honor code". This allowed students to take closed-book exams on their own time - simply based on trust. Because they were trusted, the great majority of students were honest. If they had been monitoring us, then not being trusted, we would have seen no reason to be trustworthy.
> 
> I would much rather be in a relationship with trust that in one with constant monitoring. If my wife wanted to track my actions, I would view that as a lack of trust, and feel that I was not betraying her if I found a way to evade her surveillance.


Hmmm... an interesting point. I too have noticed with staff, when given the responsibility, many rise up to live up to it and earn it, where as, when they do not have any responsibility, they act accordingly.

The thing about my tests though, perhaps I used a poor example, but it's something that can be in everyday life. Now when you give others responsibility, and entrust them on critical matters without any proven trust, when the consequences hit, who is to blame? How about giving them less responsibility, but still enough for the chance to earn that trust? That is what this thread is about. That is a test is it not?

Once the trust is there, it's there to stay, without monitoring. Ex-wife for example, only once I got paranoid against my own intuition, reading too much into the infidelity section of TAM. In reality, she had, still has, 100% trust - even from someone like me.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Are these like **** tests?


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

If I give staff responsibilities and they fail, as far as upper management is concerned, its MY failure. Then its my problem to figure out how to make my employee either behave the way I want, or terminate them. 

My job as manager is to be a good judge of my employee's abilities and characters.


Relationships for me are different. I consider the ability to trust to be critical - and checking up or being suspicious eliminates that advantage. I will live with the belief that I can trust my wife in every way. If someday I'm proven wrong, that will be a very sad day, but if not I my life will have been much better for it. 






RandomDude said:


> snip
> Hmmm... an interesting point. I too have noticed with staff, when given the responsibility, many rise up to live up to it and earn it, where as, when they do not have any responsibility, they act accordingly.
> 
> The thing about my tests though, perhaps I used a poor example, but it's something that can be in everyday life. Now when you give others responsibility, and entrust them on critical matters without any proven trust, when the consequences hit, who is to blame? How about giving them less responsibility, but still enough for the chance to earn that trust? That is what this thread is about. That is a test is it not?
> ...


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

MattMatt said:


> Are these like **** tests?


Honestly, I seem to have failed to explain myself correctly, I'm not even so sure what it comes under exactly.

I think I explained it better in this: "Now when you give others responsibility, and entrust them on critical matters without any proven trust, when the consequences hit, who is to blame? How about giving them less responsibility, but still enough for the chance to earn that trust?"

I understand the hostility however, I simply do not forgive - that too is earned for me. It's not that I go out of my way to make their lives miserable if they fail to earn my trust, I just move on. If the betrayal was more critical, as in, someone I could not easily remove out of my life, like a friend of a friend for instance, than I would of course, take steps to make sure that the trust they lose is not just mine.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

uhtred said:


> If I give staff responsibilities and they fail, as far as upper management is concerned, its MY failure. Then its my problem to figure out how to make my employee either behave the way I want, or terminate them.
> 
> My job as manager is to be a good judge of my employee's abilities and characters.


Aye, so you understand.

Still, what I do not understand is how folks can just trust by will. It has to be earned, if not, we would be judged as incompetent in our role.



> Relationships for me are different. I consider the ability to trust to be critical - and checking up or being suspicious eliminates that advantage. I will live with the belief that I can trust my wife in every way. If someday I'm proven wrong, that will be a very sad day, but if not I my life will have been much better for it.


But she has earned it has she not? Once it's earned, no point really to test it again, just a waste of time.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

uhtred said:


> Depends on what is meant by "tests". Most people believe that police entrapment is a bad idea because presenting someone with a very good opportunity to do wrong is a test that many otherwise honest people will fail.


Disagree. If the person fails, then that person, by definition, wasn't actually honest. 

That said, whether or not testing is bad, it seems to me that feeling the need to test is a shame. I couldn't go through life like that.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> it seems to me that feeling the need to test is a shame. I couldn't go through life like that.


True, people shouldn't have to, yet, I just... can't seem to understand how simpler ways would be effective in ferreting out undesirables, especially based on experience.

Intuition is great, but in my opinion, it's all subconscious information that your brain picks up that your mind does not. It can also be overpowered by other factors, such as emotion, bias, etc. As such, I feel it's important to have something real, and logical, that you can use to justify an opinion on someone.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> As such, I feel it's important to have something real, and logical, that you can use to justify an opinion on someone.


Sure, just like the posts you make here give some of us something real and logical to base our opinion about YOU on.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Faithful Wife said:


> Sure, just like the posts you make here give some of us something real and logical to base our opinion about YOU on.


Of course. I encourage it.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> It's a shame really, yet great that I decided to come out of the closet now where the consequences of being honest in regards to my diagnosis is much less than if I came out of the closet in real life. Really proves why it's best for others with PDs to deal with their issues in private, as I expected.


No actually, it's best for self aware people with PD's to find out how their mentality is different than neural normal people so that the aware PD'r can try to incorporate what most of us think of as reality into their world view. 

You are only aware of the diagnosis, but you haven't hit true self awareness yet.

Someone I know who has a PD and is self aware has said that she constantly has to remind herself that many of the thoughts in her mind are not based in reality but are being produced by her PD, and she has to double check with non-PR'rs all the time to figure out what is really going on. Otherwise she will just be listening to the PD mind train that is telling her things that aren't true about the world, herself, and other people. She says that no matter how true her mind makes things seem, she has to reject those thoughts and search deeper for a more objective truth. This is a sign of real self awareness. She now understands that non-PD'rs do not think like she does at all and where before that used to confuse her because she thought her thoughts were very common, now she realizes that she is never going to have "normal" thoughts and she must always diligently refuse to succumb to her PD thoughts or believe that they are reality.

You are still stuck in the non awareness phase of wondering why everyone doesn't think like you do.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> If my ways are as useless as you guys believe, why is it that I no longer suffer betrayal that so many others do?


I have never "suffered betrayal". And yet I've never had to "test" anyone in order to avoid suffering betrayal. Please stop telling yourself that you have devised some kind of plan that is superior to what other people do and stop telling yourself that other people in general are being betrayed in general. I have never had anyone I know go on and on about being betrayed in ways they now have to protect themselves against. You simply want to be cruel to people and are trying to find a way to justify it by claiming they "might have" betrayed you first if you hadn't done your weird tests on them. What you are really doing is trying to find someone who you can try to justify to yourself deserved your "wrath".


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

My default is to trust people. That trust isn't unlimited but its fairly broad. Then over time as I know people better the range of things that I will trust them with increase (or goes away if they betray that trust). 

So if we are talking work, I will trust a new employee, but the range of that trust is limited -I will not put them on a critical project until they have done some non-critical ones. Its not in any way a "test", I'm just choosing which of a variety of projects to give them as opposed to giving them to other workers. 






RandomDude said:


> Aye, so you understand.
> 
> Still, what I do not understand is how folks can just trust by will. It has to be earned, if not, we would be judged as incompetent in our role.
> 
> ...


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I've also never been betrayed in any large way. 



Faithful Wife said:


> I have never "suffered betrayal". And yet I've never had to "test" anyone in order to avoid suffering betrayal. Please stop telling yourself that you have devised some kind of plan that is superior to what other people do and stop telling yourself that other people in general are being betrayed in general. I have never had anyone I know go on and on about being betrayed in ways they now have to protect themselves against. You simply want to be cruel to people and are trying to find a way to justify it by claiming they "might have" betrayed you first if you hadn't done your weird tests on them. What you are really doing is trying to find someone who you can try to justify to yourself deserved your "wrath".


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Is honesty absolute?

Have you ever been in a situation where there was something you REALLY wanted to do, where you knew you would not get caught, but which you believed was immoral?

Not asking what you did, just if you have been there. 




Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Disagree. If the person fails, then that person, by definition, wasn't actually honest.
> 
> That said, whether or not testing is bad, it seems to me that feeling the need to test is a shame. I couldn't go through life like that.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

uhtred said:


> Is honesty absolute?
> 
> Have you ever been in a situation where there was something you REALLY wanted to do, where you knew you would not get caught, but which you believed was immoral?
> 
> Not asking what you did, just if you have been there.


Yes, it's pretty binary. 

I think of a sting operation run against a bike theft ring. Bikes were deliberately left in risky places, unlocked and unattended. It was effective in breaking the criminal enterprise. Yes, in the process, some people were apprehended who were not part of the ring, and they may not have stolen a bike if it wasn't an easy target, but the bottom lines is that they were bike thieves nonetheless. No way around it. 

Consider all those pedophile stings. It could be said that the bait is used to entrap, but anybody responding is a pedophile. Period. No way around it. 

I have always lived by the following tenet:
"Integrity is doing the right thing even when no one is looking"

If, at any time, I transgressed that tenet, I did not try to claim someone else had entrapped me or that it was somehow not indicative of my character; rather, I sought make amends openly and honestly, and subsequently to strengthen my character.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

uhtred said:


> I've also never been betrayed in any large way.


Neither have I.

Water finds it's own level.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Faithful Wife said:


> No actually, it's best for self aware people with PD's to find out how their mentality is different than neural normal people so that the aware PD'r can try to incorporate what most of us think of as reality into their world view.
> 
> You are only aware of the diagnosis, but you haven't hit true self awareness yet.
> 
> ...


Hmmm, perhaps I used PDs too casually, BPD, NPD, ASPD, they aren't the same thing. My bad.

Perhaps I should elaborate on my diagnosis and my intentions, to prevent further misunderstandings if at all possible. If not well, at least I can say that I have tried:

I'm not sure if I was born with ASPD, as I was a rather soft emotional child in the past, yet I do wonder sometimes if it had already manifested then based on the fact that when my parents divorced, I was happy for it, as they just didn't seem right for each other, and I was always caught in the middle. Also despite the sadistic violence of my mother on myself and my father, I was quite dependent on her, and trusted her. When she had a new boyfriend in early teens, I moved in with her, except eventually I was considered a free-loader, and my mother kicked me out. I begged... as pathetic as I was, for a week to find a place. She wanted me out the next day. In the end we compromised on three. 

On the same night, while I was actually paralysed, with intense emotion, staring at nothing, she was moaning in pleasure next door having sex. That switched something for some reason. I moved out in two days, kicked out again after two weeks as I was another mouth to feed from my friend's family. Jumped again, and found an opportunity I did not have the option to refuse, a job that could actually pay for rent and lodging, just not legal. It started from there, took many years of my life, crime that is, and despite thriving in that environment eventually I suffered way too many consequences for my actions, and did not believe it was the life I want to live. It was this time, finally being back on the grid, that I was diagnosed with ASPD.

When I began anew, at first I wanted to leave everything behind, all my experiences, all the mindsets, all the code (aka, my own set of rules), all the issues. It was a new life, a new opportunity, to be who I want to be, not who I ended up becoming. Crime would also be much more difficult to get away with on the grid. Yet it followed me. Whether it followed me or whether it was the realisation that the "legit" world isn't much different... well, that's another topic. Regardless, that was what I saw, the legal world was filled with the same betrayals, the same folk that I used to get paid to 'sort out'. Yet more cunning, more complex systems, much more powerful figures than ever on the street. At first I wanted to lay low, avoiding the jungle, I worked legally, in several occupations where a high school certificate would not be required, let alone a university degree. This was also around the time I took up alcohol, and found it useful to both stimulate social behavior when drunk, and also to use as an excuse as simply saying "I just need a drink", easily justifies and shrouds any sociopathic behaviours.

My ability to blend into society was fine but very limited to rather... erm... less educated members of society. Then... well, my wife happened. Soon after, baby bells, marriage. Responsibility. So I threw myself back out onto the world. My wife at the time, was instrumental to my success, as not only did she proceed crucial connections but she taught me how to blend in with a much more educated, and even more powerful crowd. This is when my 'functionality' as a sociopath was refined to almost perfection. Today, no one has a clue. Yet, it was cutthroat. Everyone, sociopath or not, was more than willing to do whatever it takes to survive. Just like on the street. It was all too familiar to me. This is why my mindset has not changed. If my mindset did not help me achieve what I needed to achieve in such an environment, I would not have survived.

So, the thing is, when I ask these questions, and make these threads. I do it to challenge others with these thoughts, because I'm also challenging myself. To find a better solution, especially when the overwhelming consensus is opposite to what I believe and have experienced. There must be a truth in there somewhere. Constant evolution and adaptability is humanity's greatest survival tool, and I am no different in that. This is what I am trying to find.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

uhtred said:


> My default is to trust people. That trust isn't unlimited but its fairly broad. Then over time as I know people better the range of things that I will trust them with increase (or goes away if they betray that trust).
> 
> So if we are talking work, I will trust a new employee, but the range of that trust is limited -I will not put them on a critical project until they have done some non-critical ones. Its not in any way a "test", I'm just choosing which of a variety of projects to give them as opposed to giving them to other workers.


For me it's the same thing, so I wonder if I used the word "test" too insensitively...



Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> I have always lived by the following tenet:
> "Integrity is doing the right thing even when no one is looking"


Yes, and that is actual idea behind my tests, to give people the opportunity to prove that, and many do.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> *Perhaps I should elaborate on my diagnosis and my intentions*, to prevent further misunderstandings if at all possible. If not well, at least I can say that I have tried:
> 
> .........
> 
> So, the thing is, when I ask these questions, and make these threads. I do it to challenge others with these thoughts, because I'm also challenging myself. *To find a better solution, especially when the overwhelming consensus is opposite to what I believe and have experienced. There must be a truth in there somewhere*. Constant evolution and adaptability is humanity's greatest survival tool, and I am no different in that. This is what I am trying to find.


No RD, elaborating isn't going to help anyone who is not ASPD to understand you better. Again, if you were truly self aware you would realize that. You are never going to be able to understand other people because you are too stuck in your own head (and have no empathy or "theory of mind") and therefore you are at a great disadvantage because you will not understand us and you will not be understood by us.

And as far as the second bolded part...the fact that you just keep trying to explain to us your POV instead of accepting that it isn't like most people is not in line with you saying you are willing to find a better solution if the overwhelming consensus is opposite to what you believe and have experienced. You have lots and lots of threads like this. Is this ok? Is that ok? What is so wrong with x, y, z? And yet in none of those threads have I ever seen you accept or understand that the overwhelming consensus by those reading is a reality far different than yours.

Again - - if you want a glimpse into self awareness then instead of trying to tell us more about yourself, *just accept that what you are presenting here on this thread is very different than how most people think and operate*, hence the responses. And that this fact (the huge gap between the way you think and the way most people think) is not something you should continue to try to find a way to just implement your thinking and forget everyone else's thinking. Instead, to be self aware would mean that you would be able to recognize that your thoughts are way off base and are coming from your PD. This awareness wouldn't mean that you would be able to stop thinking the way you do, instead it would just mean that you would stop telling yourself that you are "right" and everyone else is "wrong".


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> Honestly, I seem to have failed to explain myself correctly, I'm not even so sure what it comes under exactly.
> 
> I think I explained it better in this: "Now when you give others responsibility, and entrust them on critical matters without any proven trust, when the consequences hit, who is to blame? How about giving them less responsibility, but still enough for the chance to earn that trust?"
> 
> I understand the hostility however, I simply do not forgive - that too is earned for me. It's not that I go out of my way to make their lives miserable if they fail to earn my trust, I just move on. If the betrayal was more critical, as in, someone I could not easily remove out of my life, like a friend of a friend for instance, than I would of course, take steps to make sure that the trust they lose is not just mine.


"Tests" on TAM often have a very negative connotation.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Lots of situations. 

One that worries me is sting operations designed to catch potential terrorists. 

Imagine some loser guy, limited friends, limited talent, angry at the world. He mouths off how terrible the US is, and how some day he is going to "do something about it". In reality he is harmless - he doesn't have the initiative or resources to do anything. 

Now he is contacted. People listen. They encourage him. He has friends and those friends are supporting his world-view. Maybe some are attractive women who are impressed that he is willing to take action against the evil US. One time when he brags that he is going to "do something about it", those friends say "great" we can hook you up with a guy who knows how to make bombs. We can get you an untraceable stolen car. What would you like to blow up? Nah, nah, ...OH that target sounds good. You are such a brave soldier. 

They give him his (fake) explosives then arrest him when he drives the truck to Times Square.


Yes - he was willing to commit a terrorist act, but at the same time he really never would have done so on his own. He was not only given opportunity but he was psychologically manipulated into doing something he would not normally have done. 














Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Yes, it's pretty binary.
> 
> I think of a sting operation run against a bike theft ring. Bikes were deliberately left in risky places, unlocked and unattended. It was effective in breaking the criminal enterprise. Yes, in the process, some people were apprehended who were not part of the ring, and they may not have stolen a bike if it wasn't an easy target, but the bottom lines is that they were bike thieves nonetheless. No way around it.
> 
> ...


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Faithful Wife said:


> No RD, elaborating isn't going to help anyone who is not ASPD to understand you better. Again, if you were truly self aware you would realize that. You are never going to be able to understand other people because you are too stuck in your own head (and have no empathy or "theory of mind") and therefore you are at a great disadvantage because you will not understand us and you will not be understood by us.
> 
> And as far as the second bolded part...the fact that you just keep trying to explain to us your POV instead of accepting that it isn't like most people is not in line with you saying you are willing to find a better solution if the overwhelming consensus is opposite to what you believe and have experienced. You have lots and lots of threads like this. Is this ok? Is that ok? What is so wrong with x, y, z? And yet in none of those threads have I ever seen you accept or understand that the overwhelming consensus by those reading is a reality far different than yours.
> 
> Again - - if you want a glimpse into self awareness then instead of trying to tell us more about yourself, *just accept that what you are presenting here on this thread is very different than how most people think and operate*, hence the responses. And that this fact (the huge gap between the way you think and the way most people think) is not something you should continue to try to find a way to just implement your thinking and forget everyone else's thinking. Instead, to be self aware would mean that you would be able to recognize that your thoughts are way off base and are coming from your PD. This awareness wouldn't mean that you would be able to stop thinking the way you do, instead it would just mean that you would stop telling yourself that you are "right" and everyone else is "wrong".


The problem is that it works! I can't just deny the evidence right in front of me, I can't deny reality, unlike whatever PD you are talking about.

If what you say is correct, that this is all just in my head, how does it change the fact that people do not change unless they suffer the consequences of their actions? People should get what they deserve should they not? If they betray trust, why should we trust them? If they earn the same trust, strong, proven trust that comes with these tests, they rightfully have it regardless of my own choice in the matter.

I can't choose to trust, nor to respect, nor to forgive. Those three things for me has always got to be earned. Prior to coming out of the closet, many normal people agreed with me, hell I can even see my own principles still in action with others, it's the overwhelming consensus in reconciliation the wayward spouse needs to suffer the consequences; 100% transparency the one major aspect that many would struggle with, for even the slimmest chance that the trust can be EARNED back. Why is it that only now, that because I was diagnosed with ASPD, all my thoughts are in my head?

Trust - How am I to let others earn that trust, if I do not test them? To give them an opportunity to prove their worth, or to identify them as untrustworthy very early on saving alot of investment?


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

uhtred said:


> Lots of situations.
> 
> One that worries me is sting operations designed to catch potential terrorists.
> 
> ...


Hmmm... 

Well, in this case, it can be easily seen as setting him up to fail, what I would consider a flawed test.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> If what you say is correct, that this is all just in my head, how does it change *the fact* that people do not change unless they suffer the consequences of their actions?


Several people on this thread have said to you that this is not in fact a "fact" in their lives. Yet you continue to assume you are "right".


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Faithful Wife said:


> Several people on this thread have said to you that this is not in fact a "fact" in their lives. Yet you continue to assume you are "right".


Hmmm...

Ok, think I'm starting to see your point. Reminds me of someone in the past, trying to remind me that I am not 'in that life' anymore, that I don't have to be this way. Others go through their whole lives, without needing to do all this. You are correct, that I have been ignorant of others experiences.

Also ignorant, that I am no longer in such an environment where I feel I have to be. Can see how it may indeed, be all in my head.

The paranoia of betrayal, it's a life for me, I keep doing everything to mitigate that risk, and if I do take the risk, it's calculated and I'm ahead of it, like the example uhtred mentioned, especially the one in regards to sting operations. Not sure if its right or wrong, but is it the way to live?

Do I need to be like this...


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> This is when my 'functionality' as a sociopath was refined to almost perfection. Today, no one has a clue. *Yet, it was cutthroat. Everyone, sociopath or not, was more than willing to do whatever it takes to survive.* Just like on the street. It was all too familiar to me. This is why my mindset has not changed. If my mindset did not help me achieve what I needed to achieve in such an environment, I would not have survived.


The above bolded is an error in your thinking (or assumptions). No, not everyone, not even most people are willing to do anything it takes to succeed or thrive in this world.

Most people will not take advantage of (or cheat) others, most people will not steal, etc. In other words most people succeed in life without causing intentional harm to others. I am an example; there are a multitude of others. BTW, I had a sadistic mother too ... wanna see my burn scars?

As for the people that are "cutthroat"; I have encountered a few in my professional business dealings however they are relatively easy to discern and I simply don't engage in business with them.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Red Sonja said:


> The above bolded is an error in your thinking (or assumptions). No, not everyone, not even most people are willing to do anything it takes to succeed or thrive in this world.
> 
> Most people will not take advantage of (or cheat) others, most people will not steal, etc. In other words most people succeed in life without causing intentional harm to others. I am an example; there are a multitude of others. BTW, I had a sadistic mother too ... wanna see my burn scars?
> 
> As for the people that are "cutthroat"; I have encountered a few in my professional business dealings however they are relatively easy to discern and I simply don't engage in business with them.


It appears I may have used the cutthroats as a catalyst to justify my mistrust of others.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> It appears I may have used the cutthroats as a catalyst to justify my mistrust of others.


This is a statement that has a glimmer of self awareness.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> *The paranoia of betrayal, it's a life for me*, I keep doing everything to mitigate that risk, and if I do take the risk, it's calculated and I'm ahead of it, like the example uhtred mentioned, especially the one in regards to sting operations. Not sure if its right or wrong, but is it the way to live?
> 
> Do I need to be like this...


Most people do not live a life of paranoia. So if you could continue down this path of some self aware thoughts, you could realize that although may never stop feeling the paranoia, it is a product of your PD thoughts and not reality. This is the type of thing I was referring to when I mentioned my friend who has a PD and constantly has to double check if her thoughts are in line with reality.

If you continue to tell yourself that your paranoia is true and real and you need to constantly mitigate this unseen risk of others betraying you, then you won't gain any awareness from that.

If instead you tell yourself that although those thoughts exist in your head, it is not an indication of reality but rather, of your disordered thinking, and if you could resist acting on those thoughts, you may find some relief in that after some consistency with self awareness.


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> It appears I may have used the cutthroats as a catalyst to justify my mistrust of others.


Yes, I agree that is a possibility. Do you see how that attitude puts you in the constant state of potential victimhood? 

It is very hard to relax and enjoy life in a state of "victim mentality".


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Faithful Wife said:


> This is a statement that dawns on self awareness.


Ok... think I'm going to need to process all this. Thank you, everyone, for helping me see what I could not. I'll need to examine it further.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

The ultimate result of testing people is that you lose people in your life you otherwise wouldn't. As if people can't spot someone playing games. Intuition works both ways you know. So your tests only serve the purpose alienating others, and for your own twisted satisfaction. 

I would guess that someone who does these tests on people recognize that which is messed up within themselves and it makes them feel better about themselves when others fail these tests. So then you think you are equal to or better than these other people in your own narcissistic mind. 

I have no time for dishonesty and self absorbed people in my life. The thing is you think you are weeding these people out of your life for yourself, but quite the opposite, they see who you are and it is you who is removed from their life. It comes to the same end, but a narcissist believes he did himself a favor with these tests. Where in reality the favor was receieved on their end.

Oh and stopped readed after about the 5th reply. Sorry if this was already stated.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I agree, but to me that is a big problem with "tests". Its never obvious what is a "fair" test. Once you get into the mind set of testing, I think its natural to figure out how to make a test "difficult". In the case I listed the problem is that once a lot of resources have been invested in testing someone, there is an incentive to show that those resources were not wasted - by making sure the subject fails. 

At a personal level I think the same is true - if you go to the effort of testing someone I can see some (unconscious) desire to see that that test found a problem. 





RandomDude said:


> Hmmm...
> 
> Well, in this case, it can be easily seen as setting him up to fail, what I would consider a flawed test.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I think that your belief that people will do what is needed to survive is not true. There are many cases of true sacrifice where people gave their lives to help others.

At a smaller scale many people are not driven by pure self interest. They actually want to help other people. You can meta this away by saying that helping others is "selfish" because they "enjoy" helping others, but I think that would be sophistry. 

The interesting thing is that many people who honestly help others also do quite well themselves. It is not the case that those who serve their own self-interest are the happiest - if anything I think the reverse is true.

I think many sociopaths are not as invisible as they think they are. No single action makes it obvious, but taken as a whole it becomes possible to see patterns of behavior. 





RandomDude said:


> snip
> 
> My ability to blend into society was fine but very limited to rather... erm... less educated members of society. Then... well, my wife happened. Soon after, baby bells, marriage. Responsibility. So I threw myself back out onto the world. My wife at the time, was instrumental to my success, as not only did she proceed crucial connections but she taught me how to blend in with a much more educated, and even more powerful crowd. This is when my 'functionality' as a sociopath was refined to almost perfection. Today, no one has a clue. Yet, it was cutthroat. Everyone, sociopath or not, was more than willing to do whatever it takes to survive. Just like on the street. It was all too familiar to me. This is why my mindset has not changed. If my mindset did not help me achieve what I needed to achieve in such an environment, I would not have survived.
> 
> So, the thing is, when I ask these questions, and make these threads. I do it to challenge others with these thoughts, because I'm also challenging myself. To find a better solution, especially when the overwhelming consensus is opposite to what I believe and have experienced. There must be a truth in there somewhere. Constant evolution and adaptability is humanity's greatest survival tool, and I am no different in that. This is what I am trying to find.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Been thinking about this.

So far, looking back I have never lost anyone due to tests, I make it quite natural, and always alone in engineering them, aware that a faulty test is a waste of time. It's not something I did regularly, more like when I wanted to see if someone could be trusted, whether based on a bad feeling about them or based on them requesting an opportunity to prove themselves for a role etc.

No one in real life suspects my sociopathy, the closest people, such as ex-wife, didn't even believe in the diagnosis in my youth. Then again, she never believed in labels. When it became more pronounced towards our divorce and stopping alcohol, she slowly began to realise it as more sociopathic traits manifested. It's something that I have hidden quite well under the guise of personas. I'm aware of others intuition, and though some may suspect something is off, it's very easy to calm suspicions by providing snippets of information. Despite the ability to manipulate, I do try to be as honest as I can. My code dictates building trust through consistency and never to betray it. That fosters a trust that overshadows whatever red flag they may perceive. I've played this game a very, very long time. Now... I wonder if I really have to.

So many have already proved themselves to me, and like MrsHolland mentioned, intuition is enough. In all cases, 100%, it was. The tests, perhaps wasted effort to prove things that I already knew. Perhaps I underestimate myself. Life shouldn't have to be this hard correct?

I'm still processing things, right now examining my mistrust of others, which fuels my impression of the need to do these tests. It seems the only situation where it would be necessary is in a workplace environment where someone would need an actual engineered opportunity to prove themselves. Otherwise, in personal relationships, it is perhaps, wasted time and effort. Not only to engineer it, but to hide it and make it natural. When I first opened this thread, I saw my tests as a way for others to earn the trust that otherwise would be very difficult to earn with me. Now... I question it.

Right now I'm in a good position to try a new way, I live in first world conditions and have financial freedom. A far cry from the rat race and my youth. It's just not logical to continue living life with all these defenses when it is unnecessary. Perhaps I'll keep this side of me locked up, in case I ever need to revert back to my suspicious ways, but right now... yeah, think it's worth a shot.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Good logic. Excellent.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Now in the process of re-wiring, another issue which also fuels the desire for these tests; my vengeful ways. When others fail these tests, it's with bread crumbs, they do not betray me in a way that affects me, as such, my vengeance is very minimal - as simple as moving on. However when someone betrays me and it affects me however, that's when my hate truly comes out. I am prone to seek vengeance which may be useful in some regards, like when my ex-mother-in-law went on about how I would never be successful, the ultimate revenge was simply to succeed, and I did. 

However there are times when vengeance may demand high risks, such as violence and other unlawful acts, as I still believe it is human responsibility to reward or punish others to encourage or discourage a certain way to be. I was on a spent conviction yet I was charged with assault and grievious bodily harm in court cases that lasted for over a year and caused undue stress on my family in our earlier years. Since then I began training in more grappling techniques to humiliate, cause pain, but not to cause damage that can be used against me in the court of law. In a way, these tests, actually help me manage my vengeful ways. Not sure if people can understand that. This is why I am paranoid too, not that I fear whatever damage the betrayal may inflict on my life, but what I may do in response. This is another issue, and a harder one, to break.

Right now I am reminding myself that intuition alone is enough, that I should be able to avoid those who would bring out the worst in me, as I have. 100%... yet I justify these tests, paranoia, mistrust.

Nah... think I answered my own question...

Alright... I no longer see a reason for these tests. I have decided it stops now.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Aaaaaannndddd......back to disordered thinking.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Faithful Wife said:


> Aaaaaannndddd......back to disordered thinking.


I know, and it needs a new thread. 

Tests are done, finished. The thread has run its course. I have made my decision.

I have other demons to sort out.

MODS: Light request for this thread to be closed.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

Final thought, life works in a way that these tests of loyalty will come up from time to time anyway without you having to manufacture them.


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

RandomDude said:


> The problem is that it works! I can't just deny the evidence right in front of me, I can't deny reality, unlike whatever PD you are talking about.
> 
> If what you say is correct, that this is all just in my head, how does it change the fact that people do not change unless they suffer the consequences of their actions? People should get what they deserve should they not? If they betray trust, why should we trust them? If they earn the same trust, strong, proven trust that comes with these tests, they rightfully have it regardless of my own choice in the matter.
> 
> ...


RD, there is a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature that you have and that is that there isn't just ONE reality. Each of us lives in a reality that is influenced by our own emotions, experiences, and expectations. So while you might have a certain reaction to a situation it is likely that someone else will have a totally different interpretation and reaction to that same situation. One is not necessarily better than another. If you learn to recognize that you'll have a much easier time understanding people and engaging in society. 

I had a very interesting discussion with a psychologist about this a few years ago. It was under the premise of when does an action done by a person define them. Essentially, at what point does someone that lies become a liar? At what point does someone that steals become a thief? At what point does someone that cheats become a cheater? At what point does someone that tells the truth become honest? The reality is that there isn't a clear cut point at when a single or even group of actions permanently defines a person, and since a person's behavior is so heavily influenced by their environment and circumstances out of their control, for many people we can correct their "bad" behavior by simply recognizing that they weren't in the right environment to succeed and change that environment. So instead of judging and condemning the person we can recognize the fallibility of the human condition and understand that even "bad" people can become better if we let them. 

I tried to communicate this to my kids recently when we took a shuttle from the airport. The driver wasn't friendly/welcoming and didn't help with our bags. None of the people on the shuttle tipped him, except for me. I explained to my kids that we didn't know why he wasn't welcoming and helpful and there could be a legitimate reason for it (e.g. in pain from a back injury). Since a big part of his salary is tips and we know that, we don't get to forego our obligation to him simply because he didn't meet his obligation to us. If I wanted to not tip him then it would have been my obligation to ask him why he wasn't being friendly and helpful and then judge on the facts presented to me rather than making a decision based on my partial understanding of the situation without knowing the whole story. And, I did fail somewhat in my obligation because it was a smaller tip than I normally give.


----------

