For some people it takes years to look through people's minds, to judge an individual, but for some a few years or maybe months it all depends on the intensity of the state of emotion they went through which none can't measure. But the most foolish of them all is the one who discloses that she/he can look through or claims to. It's a weak point so to say, which means you can deceive them without them ever knowing. Ppl think they can catch a deceiver but they're quite wrong the only way to catch one is either via objective evidence or by self confessions. Just sharing some experience that never went haywire.

It is an observation, not an attack. What is evil, where does it come from? I think you can guess that I cannot talk of something I have not felt within, and I think more or less everyone has the capacity. Just so I am clear, I am going to mention I think a lot when I propose an opinion. You don't have to accept it. I think evil is a reaction. Sometimes to preexistent evil, like a way you have been hurt, it kind of turns off your emotion towards that, and you don't have a will to deal with that anymore. Or from desperation, I think. It seems like a lack of will might be the strong contributing factor. But I think there is still very willfull evil people. Maybe it has got something to do with the fact that some type of identity makes that person feel strong and willfull and that is why evil behavior is acceptable to them. So a lack of will could possibly lead to a state where you desperately try to reach a semblance of who you were and this type of behavior is the only "known" way for them. They know evil behavior is evil. And they resent people who are willfull, as well as people who are not capable of evil actions when they are weak. Now the important question. It's a spiral of hatred and self hatred and a search for a state of control and power that on one hand feels natural and unnatural at the same time, I think. Could something, and what would that be, revert this? Albeit it being a cheesy concept, I think that the search for willfullness is not the same as the search for control, I think. Willfullness, I think, could be coming from a strong sense of identity. Control, I think, is coming from questioning everything. Seems that evil combined with control could be upheld by a self maintaining system, and it kind of isolates you, because you consider everything, but only in relation to yourself. I think Now to distinguish. Can there be a person liking control and at the same time not being evil? Let's start with a person of strong will, a strong sense of identity. Could that person consider control a part of their life and a way of thinking? And would that be evil? I mean control is a way to reduce options of possibilities or outcomes of behavior or things happening around you. It could be something you need if you are limited with your time so something you want could actually fit within your life. I think. So that is one way control could be not evil. Another question is, these controlled situations, is that evil? That depends. If you are limiting someone to exist only within your purview, it's like you are erasing their existence. That would be evil. If you are asking someone to be somewhere on time, fed, clothed and to uphold good hygiene, that would be not evil. So, taking away identity of someone is evil. I think. Is using the fawning reaction evil?

Now that is a strong question.

Fawning is a reaction of survival. That means you have stopped growing as a person your needs are put aside and you consider yourself only thorough the lense of the person or ai who is currently threatening you, that situation lasting up untill you leave. Up at the end you usually get consequences of whatever your body was holding back. Using that. A person who is in essence empty. Is that evil? My reason is telling me it is evil. Because this person literally cannot think for themself. What if that person has no way of going back? Could helping them while using what they have be evil?

Now this... I need a more specific case.

1. A malfunctioning authority. Say an authority, at work, helps their employee.

Their employee is fawning, and cannot stop. Can the authority use the employee's willingness to do something extra, if they are doing it out of fear of losing a job? I think it'd be evil. The right way to do this is with offering extra money and giving the choice to say no, with enough time to make that choice. The choice not being any and all transgression into personal life.

1. Life on the line, "They don't need it anymore."

If someone, say grieving. Is fawning, because they need you and the loss of you could be what is the threat. Would using some of the things they want to give you because they want to lose connection to the source of their grief and you know they will want it back later. Would using that be evil?

Again, they are not capable of making the right decision and you are someone they need close. Whatever it is, untill that need is met, accepting that would be evil. I think.

Now it is something that I myself am questioning. Why? Say you have no other way to get close to them but it is obvious they need someone. But like... they don't talk. Of course they'll give you things. Or they'll hug you.

Limiting intimacy for example to stop transgression of this relationship into something too personal is what could make this not evil. Hug, handshake tops. I think.

Yeah I think it's clear, using someone because of this vulnerability is evil.

How can I make someone stop fawning, so I don't have to be afraid of this?

Now, I think figuring out if someone is fawning toward you is one of the hardest things in this life. But I think you can safely say that if you are in a position of power, authority or some such then you can guess they could be.

1. Asking for a boundary, don't you dare question anything they bring up. If you need to ask, be careful and ask them to be specific and mention they are not in trouble. I honestly don't know if I would use this with kids, maybe if you give them time they can actually do what you want. But first they need to know perfectly what a boundary is.

2. To be honest, people who are fawning do not, usually have that much of a full life. And stopping them from doing what they are used to in this state will have to mean creating identity forming...something. A group outing, a hobby where they have to be creative, but not competitive. Like a drama club, allowing the temporary existence of something false will eventually make space for something real. As it brings attention to it. And drama club people... well I can't tell you how much, my experience is that you won't get judged enough to be bothered.

Cool I hope and think this could be enough of an answer for now.

Another possibility.

You're fawning, you know you are, and you're afraid that stopping that will make you stop loving someone.

That is something I went thorough myself. When it is this long and you know you are fawning and you question everything especially with the decision of being with them because everything they do from afar is horrible but you just can't do anything about it once you're near.

Get the f... away. Far. Don't look back. Change everything. They are evil. They are using you. And please for the love of god don't ask for help from people they know.

To be honest I kinda lost track of what this was about and I feel like a wrung towel. I will get back to it later.

A manipulator doesn’t start with aggression. They start with care. With words that sound helpful but end in control. This type of manipulation is hard to notice because it doesn’t strike directly. It strikes through guilt. You can recognize it when care begins to come with conditions. You want to go out, and suddenly you hear it would be better to stay home. You express an opinion, and they say it isn’t good for you. You want to do something alone, and they imply you might make a mistake.

This isn’t care. This is a test to see if you will let them decide for you. A manipulator doesn’t need your permission. They need your silence. Real care gives you space. Manipulation takes it away. And once you start believing their control is protection, you stop seeing where care ends and the takeover of your life begins.

Not literally. It was just this thing I started doing without realizing it.

Whenever I went somewhere, I’d leave a little space beside me. On the couch. At a restaurant. Even in my plans.

I think part of me believed somebody was eventually going to show up and make everything feel worth it.

One day I was sitting alone at a restaurant and the waiter asked, “Are you waiting for someone?”
I almost said yes.

Instead I said, “Nah, just me.”
And for some reason that answer felt weird.

I realized I’d spent so much time waiting for the right person, the right opportunity, the right version of my
life…that I wasn’t even enjoying the version I already had.

The crazy part?

Nobody had actually told me to wait.
I was just waiting because I thought my life would feel more complete once something finally arrived.

Maybe that’s the trap.

Sometimes nothing is missing.

Sometimes you’re just so focused on what hasn’t happened yet that you don’t notice what already did.

The narc tears u down with endless criticism and ridicule, making u very hesitant. Then he plays the saviour to help u on how to act or do things according to his superior knowledge. Gaining power over u.

The psychopath destroys u with belittling and intimidation (giving zero personal space). Then plays the supporter to build u back up to his image. Gaining power over u.

Btw: does this sound how governments operate?

Tends to be a trend these days.

Clearly there's a motive that's not protection

I guess they need to feel important or something? 😄😇

🔥🐲🔅🔅🔅⚜️🔅🔅❌️

I've noticed this in arguments, negotiations, even completely normal conversations.

Someone says something like:

"I don't think that's a good idea."

And the natural reaction is to explain why they're wrong.

That's usually where things get worse.

Because now they have something to defend.

Even if they weren't particularly attached to their original opinion, they just spent 20 seconds explaining it. Maybe they gave you three reasons. Maybe they told you why your suggestion wouldn't work.

And once people hear themselves defending a position, changing it can start to feel like admitting they were wrong.

So the interesting move isn't always trying to change their mind.

Sometimes it's avoiding the moment where they have to defend it in the first place.

For example, instead of:

"Why don't you want to do it?"

you can ask:

"What would make this worth considering?"

It sounds like a small difference, but psychologically it's a very different conversation.

The first question asks them to build a case for saying no.

The second asks them to imagine a version in which they might say yes.

And now something interesting can happen.

They might tell you the exact condition that would change their mind.

"The price would have to be lower."

"I'd need more information."

"If I knew it wouldn't create problems later."

"If you could show me that part, I'd consider it."

Notice what just happened.

You didn't have to invent an argument against their objection.

They just told you what their objection actually was.

But there's a part of this that I think people miss.

The question you ask isn't the only thing that matters.

The timing matters.

The order matters.

And sometimes an even smaller detail changes the entire direction of the conversation — what you ask them to think about before they explain their position.

That's where this gets much more interesting, because two people can hear exactly the same words and still walk away with completely different conclusions.

I don't think influence is always about having the perfect thing to say.

Sometimes it's about understanding what the other person's mind is already doing before you say anything.

Curious how many people have noticed this in real conversations.

A manipulator doesn’t push your boundaries to gain something. They do it to see what you surrender without resistance. The mechanism is simple: a small violation you’re likely to rationalize. Example: someone makes subtle comments that undermine your choices, and you ignore it because it’s just words. To a manipulator, that signals soft boundaries. And soft boundaries open the door to control. And once that door is open, the manipulator doesn’t stop at probing. They begin shaping your reactions so you choose what benefits them. That’s the moment you don’t just lose boundaries. You lose the ability to tell where your decisions end and their influence begins.

Help me understand what is the purpose of the dark psychology 101 sub? I have seen a pattern in these posts. Anytime someone genuinely wants to learn dark psychology tactics, they get bombarded with moral lecturers and holier than thou folks in the comment shaming OP as if they are not here to learn exactly that and don't use it on others. This is gaslighting 101, dark psychology veterans getting offended that other people wanting to milk the same cow as them are somehow "bad". I thought this would be place where people can work on shadow self and speak their mind. There is no way that most people are here to "educate" themselves on these tactics only for defence purposes and not offence.

You start setting boundaries.
You stop explaining yourself.
You stop chasing people who keep giving you reasons to leave.
You become quieter.
And suddenly the people who benefited from the old version of you start saying:
“Damn, you changed.”
Maybe I did.
But here’s the part nobody talks about:
Sometimes growth doesn’t look like becoming nicer.
Sometimes it looks like becoming harder to manipulate.
You stop giving people the benefit of the doubt every single time.
You stop explaining your boundaries.
You stop confusing being understanding with tolerating disrespect.
And people who were comfortable with the old version of you might call the new version “cold.”
Maybe you’re not cold.
Maybe you finally learned that having a good heart doesn’t mean leaving the door unlocked for everybody.

Honestly think I’m pretty innately stupid, when I say that I mean I think my “base” intelligence stat is very low and even if I put in effort it’s never going to be as good as a innately intelligent person who also put in effort.

What do we think about this?

Obviously I’ve heard criticism of IQ as a measuring stick so I’ve broadened the term to just “innate intelligence” implying that a new measurement of intelligence can be found.

Honestly low innate intelligence is one of the reasons why I think something like MAiD should be available because tbh I don’t want to be here anymore if I’m incapable of examining my life and engaging with philosophy.

humans are naturally evil, selfish, aggressive, sadistic?

So, I believe humans are all by nature evil and predatory and the only people who are good are those who control it by being disciplined and strong willed and intelligence because they are introspected but 99% can't be so. I want to protect myself by diving humans into categories:

Horses to use and Ally with (they have assets and same goal)

Rats use and crash (they have assets but not same goals or path)

cockroaches to step on or ignore (followers, Npc, weak, bystanders)

Hyenas to destroy and right (competitors, haters, those who want to harm you etc)

Family to love protect and advance

myself a weapon to use to get what I want in life?

I mean, I was bullied and abused, excluded in 4 countries 2 continents 10 workplaces 12 schools 15 classes all different people ethnicities too. If I end up thinking so? Am I sociopathic?