Dark Triad and Anti-mask movement
An accepted paper, subject to peer review, suggests that resistance to masks and social distancing can be linked the the “Dark Triad” of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy.
There’s certainly some psychotic element to it.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
Have you lost your mind, Dr. Tabor? The basis of the study you report is an Internet-based survey, for goodness sake. As a medical professional, you should also be aware it is unethical to diagnose psychological conditions from a distance, or outside of a doctor/patient setting.
This article you are promoting is no better than tree-hugger climate science.
LikeLike
You can’t diagnose an individual by correlation, but you can link patterns of behavior to personality types.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Not in this instance, for the reasons given:
It’s not rational to base a social/political opinion on such questionable science.
LikeLike
I’m not a scientist or psychologist. However, I sense that those who balk at mask wearing are those who, for one reason or another, have no sense of community.
They live in a nation of 330 million “other people” to whom they have no obligation, responsibility or even a reason to act courteously.
Now does that mean we are all our brother”s keeper? In a national crisis of being attacked I think the question is answered as it was in WW2.
Yes, we are under attack and for some reason, those whose behavior puts others at risk are given leeway, support and a voice by leadership and powerful people. In WW2, they might have been arrested for aiding and abetting the enemy.
So we have 140,000 plus dead, a trashed economy and no end in sight. Can’t blame the ignorant “no maskers” for all of the issues. More like those who helped send messages to the enemy about vulnerable targets rather than major strategies.
Narcissism probably. Looking tough is being maskless. Machiavellianism? Teasing dogs and licking doorknobs might fit that. Psychopathy? Sure, why not. Lack of any empathy might fit in that slot.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “I sense that those who balk at mask wearing are those who, for one reason or another, have no sense of community.”
If they don’t, they are entitled to it. Personally, I’m more afraid of the people who make “sense of community” into a moral litmus test than I am of the people who don’t wear a face mask in public.
LikeLike
I know you are.
“Community” to you means raging Marxism.
Community to me is simply awareness of the safety and respect for others that you encounter. All the more important in a crisis like this pandemic.
Aiding and abetting the spread of a contagion is on par with spying in a war.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Aiding and abetting the spread of a contagion is on par with spying in a war.”
Thinking as unbalanced as that is why I fear those who promote concepts of social responsibility. You should buy a gun so you can kill the people you come across who violate your standard.
LikeLike
“Thinking as unbalanced as that”….
What is so unbalanced about it? Spying in a war helps cause the deaths of soldiers. Spreading a contagion helps cause the deaths of citizens.
And wasn’t it Mr. Trump who declared himself a war time President concerning the pandemic?
Easy for the clear minded to see where Len came to his conclusion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Shoot the bastards he says.
I’ll run your idea by other folks and see what they suggest.
I would like to think that they agree with me and that we stick within the bounds of law.
Social responsibility is what we rely on to smooth the way to civil behavior.
Social irresponsibility is the major cause for concern. This can run the gamut of littering to murder. Or, more generally, that the irresponsible person is making others work harder, pay more or just suffer consequences of bad behavior.
Tax cheats, for example. Such irresponsible behavior causes others to bear their burden of payIng not only their share of the nations expenses, but that of the cheaters as well. There are laws to catch the cheaters, but the better option is to be responsible and pay what is owed.
Some conservatives put a lot of stock in visible patriotism. Taking a knee is bad, saluting the flag is good. Those who condemn the kneeling, say it is a matter of social responsibility and those that don’t act accordingly should suffer some kind of consequence. And they have by being called out by our president no less. Demands that they be denied their livelihoods.
Yet, breathing aerosols full of virus is not a problem for you? That we should not condemn or shame because that is somehow wrong.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “What is so unbalanced about it?”
There is literally no science to support the view that mask use by the general public is certain to prevent the spread of contagion. There is scientific evidence that it may do so, and there are studies which show that mask use by medical professionals in controlled environments can prevent the spread of contagion in those environments, but there are no studies which validate face mask use by the general public.
It is therefore unbalanced thinking to presume certainty where scientists have documented none.
More generally, preventing the spread of contagion might not be the best approach. There’s a rational argument to be made for encouraging viral spread in non-at-risk populations so as to create herd immunity. Failing to address this line of reasoning is another example of unbalanced thinking.
LikeLike
There is no way to spread coronavirus among the low risk population at the level required for herd immunity while still protecting the vulnerable population.
There is also the problem that there isn’t just one herd. Herd immunity in urban settings does not confer herd immunity in rural or suburban areas.
And the herds come into contact with each other.
As to the question of mask’s effectiveness in reducing the spread of coronavirus there is a very large sample that demonstrates the success of widespread mask use. It’s called Japan.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Shoot the bastards he says.”
Not me. “Shoot the bastards” is the logical extension of the line of reasoning (social responsibility) YOU promote. The question is whether YOU are willing to kill in service of a principle you claim to be valid.
After all, if socially irresponsible people kill others as the result of their behavior, don’t they deserve be be killed themselves, at your hand?
LikeLike