Quote:
Originally Posted by Mansun
See updates above.  |
Replied in kind above. Again, please cite references, or quit offering your opinions as facts.
P.S. Another late edit found here:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mansun
|
Interestingly, the Machiavellian Scale has nothing to do with a mental disorder, nor is it a test corporations use in qualifying candidates (having administered such employee screening tests, I can tell you corporations are more interested in theft than Machiavellianism); of course, you would understand that if you had read the summation of the paper you cited, which states
"is thus far theoretical, and awaits empirical testing". As a matter of fact, anyone can take a "Mach IV Test" to see if they are Machiavellian.
Most people fall in the middle of the scale (so even you, Mansun, have quite a bit of Machiavelli in you, I am sure). It is found here:
http://www.salon.com/books/it/1999/09/13/machtest/
Quote:
High Machs constitute a distinct type: charming, confident and glib, but also arrogant, calculating and cynical, prone to manipulate and exploit....
True low Machs, however, can be kind of dependent, submissive and socially inept.
|
Hmmm...I would not want to be a Low Mach, would you?
Not surprisingly, persons with a High Mach score are neither sociopaths nor psycopaths, and tend to make outstanding politicians and corporate CEO's (it also represents the vast majority of political leaders from the U.S. and Britain for the past couple centuries -- whether you rate them good or bad on your
Barometric Indices of Character Habits).
Needless to say the term Machiavellianism in the psychological sense is a convenient name (like Lou Gehrig's disease) to place on a test of people's demeanor.