NOTE to readers: I would like to know whether this was crossposted,   
   with the main discussion talking place outside of sci.bio.paleontology.   
   I use New Google Groups for posting, and it does not allow crossposting,   
   nor does it let readers know whether articles are crossposted. The   
   old Google Groups was much more helpful, at least at first.   
      
      
   On Saturday, October 27, 2018 at 10:16:40 AM UTC-4, Martin Edwards wrote:   
   > On 10/27/2018 1:38 AM, Oh so rich & successful JTEM wrote:   
   > >   Martin Edwards wrote:   
   > >   
   > >> I agree with all that, but the term is also used indiscriminately by   
   > >> people who are not aware of those definitions.   
   > >   
   > > "Psycho" is far more abused than narcissist, and every   
   > > bit as inaccurately as you describe. The norm seems to   
   > > be to identify the precise OPPOSITE of psychotic behavior   
   > > as psychotic.   
   > >   
   > > Psychos, for example, tend to be charming! Not obnoxious   
   > > assholes but charming! And they're manipulative, though   
   > > not in any way they think would be obvious... else it   
   > > wouldn't work, now would it? So you can say that psychos   
   > > hide. They conceal what they are. This is how they get   
   > > away with it.   
   > >   
   >   
   > Point.  I think a lot of psychiatric terminology is flung around carelessly.   
      
   A very recent example here in sci.bio.paleontology is that of   
   a highly dishonest person posting under the byline "Oxyaena"   
   has accused a number of people of Dunning-Kruger effect.   
   But Oxyaena herself is by far the person who most displays   
   this effect.   
      
   This kind of behavior is often termed "Projection" -- another   
   much abused psychological term -- but I prefer a description   
   of a dirty debating tactic/strategy which gets at the probable   
   motive in many cases, including that of Oxyaena:   
      
        The Pre-emptive Peremptory Ploy   
      
   This can be a one-shot thing or it can be frequently employed for   
   a long time until the payoff comes.  Here is a description of   
   the simplest form of it.   
      
   The preliminary step(s) consist[s] of making a carefully chosen,   
   unsupported (and usually unsupportable) accusation about a person--   
   call him/her X -- of which the accuser is (or is very likely to be)   
   grossly guilty.   
      
   The payoff comes when the grossly guilty party earns the accusation,   
   Person X points it out, and then the accuser claims that Person  X is   
   indulging in a Pee Wee Hermanism, or projecting, or hitting some high   
   score on  "the irony meter".  [Back in the 90's it was more commonly   
   called the "the irony-o-meter".]   
      
      
   Peter Nyikos   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)