Things That Are on Your Mind

[thePlinko]

This is factually false. Around 1 to 2 percent of people have this ability. Take your bs and kindly leave.

Wow, a Vice article. Only the most academic of sources I see. Truly no quackery here made for the sole purpose of viewership. Nevermind how if you took that to nearly any qualified psychologist and told them you could feel dead people they’d simply laugh.

 

[Reksew_Trebla]

Wow, a Vice article. Only the most academic of sources I see. Truly no quackery here made for the sole purpose of viewership. Nevermind how if you took that to nearly any qualified psychologist and told them you could feel dead people they’d simply laugh.

I told you to take your bs and leave. You are factually wrong. I am an empath. My mom is an empath. 1 to 2 percent of all people are empaths. You can't just say 1 to 2 percent of people don't exist. F off with your idiotic hate.

 

[thePlinko]

I told you to take your bs and leave. You are factually wrong. I am an empath. My mom is an empath. 1 to 2 percent of all people are empaths. You can't just say 1 to 2 percent of people don't exist. F off with your hate.

There’s nothing hateful or bs about telling you that you’re wrong. There is literally no evidence that empaths are a thing.

 

[Reksew_Trebla]

There’s nothing hateful or bs about telling you that you’re wrong. There is literally no evidence that empaths are a thing.

You are literally saying I don't exist because you are too idiotic to understand. That is hate.

There have been studies that have proven this. The article I linked is literally discussing one of these studies. How is that not evidence?

You are wrong. F off with your hate.

 

[ExLight]

This is factually false. Around 1 to 2 percent of people have this ability. Take your bs and kindly leave.

You should always take articles with a grain of salt probably. Journalists often distort or misunderstand scientific talk.
It doesn't seem to be the case here, but this is not what the article says though.

 

[Reksew_Trebla]

You should always take articles with a grain of salt probably. Journalists often distort or misunderstand scientific talk.
It doesn't seem to be the case here, but this is not what the article says though.

Bruh, I AM AN EMPATH. I don't need an article to confirm I exist. I have had this gift for years longer than I knew what it was called.

Also, the literal first thing the article says is that around 1 to 2 percent of people have this ability.

 

[thePlinko]

You are literally saying I don't exist because you are too idiotic to understand. That is hate.

There have been studies that have proven this. The article I linked is literally discussing one of these studies. How is that not evidence?

You are wrong. F off with your hate.

When did I say you didn’t exist? I said that empaths don’t exist, not you.

How is questioning the validity of someone who says they can magically listen to people’s thoughts idiotic? How is it hate?

I’ve already pointed out exactly why that article is full of it. Do you want some more reasons? How about the fact that “discussing” a study isn’t evidence, especially when they don’t even link the study at all and just say that it exists? At best this is a secondary source that doesn’t even point the viewer in the direction of the primary one.

Nobody is hating anyone just because they tell you you’re wrong.

 

[Reksew_Trebla]

When did I say you didn’t exist? I said that empaths don’t exist, not you.

How is questioning the validity of someone who says they can magically listen to people’s thoughts idiotic? How is it hate?

I’ve already pointed out exactly why that article is full of it. Do you want some more reasons? How about the fact that “discussing” a study isn’t evidence, especially when they don’t even link the study at all and just say that it exists? At best this is a secondary source that doesn’t even point the viewer in the direction of the primary one.

Nobody is hating anyone just because they tell you you’re wrong.

I am an empath. If empaths don't exist, I don't exist. F off with your hate.

EDIT: Since you refuse to stop being a hateful a**, I'm ignoring your account, because I can't take this anymore.

 

[MuffleDark]

Although there's a lot of controversy on whether there's scientific evidence for empaths, I think you're being a bit rude Plink in the way you're going about this. What you're saying is that there isn't any evidence empaths are real, but really there isn't evidence that proves the contrary either. I don't think reksew would lie about something like this. I don't consider myself an empath, but I do think myself an empathetic person and I don't think you're going about this the right way.

Maybe a reason why there's so few information about this is because such a small population make up empaths. There isn't really any conclusive evidence either way. So there isn't any reason why someone couldn't be a true empath. Hopefully more research will happen in the future.

I believe you Reksew. I don't have any right to say if you're actually one or not. That's completely up to you. <3

 

[thePlinko]

I am an empath. If empaths don't exist, I don't exist. F off with your hate.

You are not an empath, because empaths don’t exist. Anybody who tells you that they do either want your money, or they were also tricked by the former.

Saying “I am an empath, so therefore if they don’t exist, neither do I” is not a logically sound argument because you are basing it off the assumption that both sides of the argument are in agreement that empaths exist. Instead of proving that empaths are a real phenomenon, you are instead trying to use the idea that empaths are real to prove your own existence, and that therefore empaths must be real.

This is called circular reasoning, and it is a logical fallacy.

Furthermore, chanting “F off with your hate” every time someone says something that doesn’t align with your own worldview is not an appropriate response. Now instead of opening up a conversation about the topic that could potentially expand the worldview of both you and any other participant, your are actively pushing away anyone. This just leads to you living in a world where you’ve trained yourself to hate anyone who doesn’t see everything your way.

 

[thePlinko]

Although there's a lot of controversy on whether there's scientific evidence for empaths, I think you're being a bit rude Plink in the way you're going about this. What you're saying is that there isn't any evidence empaths are real, but really there isn't evidence that proves the contrary either.

One of the first rules of logical thinking is the burden of proof, meaning that it is easier to prove something false than it is to prove it true. Unless every single piece of evidence is pointing to it being true, then for the purposes of our own knowledge on the subject it must be false.

 

[ExLight]

Bruh, I AM AN EMPATH. I don't need an article to confirm I exist. I have had this gift for years longer than I knew what it was called.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm not denying the existence of empaths. I'm saying that you're mixing a few things up and misusing an article as an attempt of backing it up.

I'm sorry to break it to you, but what you described as being as an empath is very basic and common on people. People are social creatures and one of the main key factors is how we can empathize with others. We take clues from body language, tone, behavioral patterns, etc. Our very brain has stuff focused on doing this sort of thing, mirror neurons are the explain why we yawn when we see someone yawning. Another example of empathy is mass hysteria. Hell, people watch movies and soap operas because they want a character to empathize with. It's normal and inherent to people.

If you do feel different from others, you might be the case frax mentioned, where it has an overlap with synesthesia or other deeper aspects, which by itself is likely very controversial due to not having enough non-anecdotal evidence. If you say you're one, I'm not going to question it.
What I'm calling out is that you're mixing up pseudo-scientific concepts like telepathy and spiritualism, and I'm simply saying those aren't what the article you're using as "evidence" is talking about.

 

[Fraxinus]

Empath is a pop-culture term for characgers in fiction with a heightened spiritual ability or something.

The first problem i see is attributing that term to a real condition of someone having hyperempathy. People with hyperempathy are very in tune with the apparent feelings of others, maybe to the point they over-read the feelings of others. Tense situations with people are especially difficult. Perhaps using the same term for both affects the way one would interpret their condition as an overly empathetic person: "because thats how empaths are in fiction, this must be how I should interpet what it is I sense from other people," one with hyperempathy may think, and before they know it, they're seeing what they want to see, feeling what the want to feel, all in order to validate a fictional definition of a condition they have. But hyperempaths in real life dont have supernatural powers; it'd be easy to interpret that way because the more empathetic you are the more easily influenced you are by external ideas.

Reskew, if you have heightened empathy, I believe you, and I do as well, but you probably shouldn't be surprised if people dont take it seriously when the definition you use for it is the one used in science fiction, and likening it to a superpower.

 

[Reksew_Trebla]

Although there's a lot of controversy on whether there's scientific evidence for empaths, I think you're being a bit rude Plink in the way you're going about this. What you're saying is that there isn't any evidence empaths are real, but really there isn't evidence that proves the contrary either. I don't think reksew would lie about something like this. I don't consider myself an empath, but I do think myself an empathetic person and I don't think you're going about this the right way.

Maybe a reason why there's so few information about this is because such a small population make up empaths. There isn't really any conclusive evidence either way. So there isn't any reason why someone couldn't be a true empath. Hopefully more research will happen in the future.

I believe you Reksew. I don't have any right to say if you're actually one or not. That's completely up to you. <3

Empath is a pop-culture term for characgers in fiction with a heightened spiritual ability or something.

The first problem i see is attributing that term to a real condition of someone having hyperempathy. People with hyperempathy are very in tune with the apparent feelings of others, maybe to the point they over-read the feelings of others. Tense situations with people are especially difficult. Perhaps using the same term for both affects the way one would interpret their condition as an overly empathetic person: "because thats how empaths are in fiction, this must be how I should interpet what it is I sense from other people," one with hyperempathy may think, and before they know it, they're seeing what they want to see, feeling what the want to feel, all in order to validate a fictional definition of a condition they have. But hyperempaths in real life dont have supernatural powers; it'd be easy to interpret that way because the more empathetic you are the more easily influenced you are by external ideas.

Reskew, if you have heightened empathy, I believe you, and I do as well, but you probably shouldn't be surprised if people dont take it seriously when the definition you use for it is the one used in science fiction, and likening it to a superpower.

Thank you both for believing me. I think I'm done with this conversation though, so I'm not discussing this any further. I just thought I could safely talk about this here, because of how respectful the community is, but I should have known better.

I didn't think about an ignore button on this site, because I've never seen such a great community, so I got frustrated that I had to deal with this here. If something like this comes up again, I'll just ignore the intrusive account right away next time, because I don't want to cause a scene like this. I have issues with heightened emotions (I take medication for this, but there is only so much that can do), so I really don't like it when I slip up like this. I really do try hard to keep my emotions in check, but I'm not perfect.

Anyways, what I'm trying to get at is that I'm sorry for not containing myself. I feel really bad about this. Like I said earlier, I'm not continuing the conversation anymore to prevent further problems. I hope you all can forgive me for this.

 

[Fraxinus]

No worries. Some things are just super difficult to communicate and/or articulate. And being passionate about something that is difficult to talk about definitely sucks. Sometimes you can find some people to talk to about those more personal things but it's hard to out in the open. But I hope ZD can continue to be a fun place for you to hang out and chat, regardless.