Talk:The Psychopath Test
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Reviews and controversy edit
Anyone else notice a fair amount of deliberate irony in how this section was edited?
"Robert D. Hare has also released a longer article about Ronson's book, stating that it trivializes the work of clinical professionals and presents psychopathy in an unrealistic and overly simplistic manner. Hare states that his books entitled 'Snakes in Suits' and 'Without Conscience' are better.[11]" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.198.200 (talk) 03:41, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
- Unintentional irony, I'm afraid. At the time I couldn't think of a better way to word it! On rereading it I must say I had a bit of a chuckle. Honestly though, Hare's criticisms are fair, and his books are better :) That Damn Snipergirl 04:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
- To clarify the above (and I have re-added the first commentors auto-added IP signature that they deleted before adding the quotation): it was in fact myself who added the consciously ironic comment about Hare's book titles; Snipergirl subsequently expanded the sentence in line with Hare's characterization of his work. Incidentally Ronson's book itself remarks on Hare's popularist use of animal metaphors. Sighola2 (talk) 07:37, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
- I think Hare's problem, is misunderstanding Ronson's manner, which comes across when he writes. Jon was being ironic and understated, when he wrote about his new-found powers of psychopath-spotting. He was trivialising it on purpose. Because it was funny, which is something people like in books. I'll blame it on the usual Americans not understanding the Brits' innate sense of humour. I'd bet you anything Jon's book, which I've read, is more entertaining and more interesting, even if it's not quite as scientific.
188.29.165.32 (talk) 21:18, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Dead links at journal edit
Dead links at journal should be replaced with current link for Hare's criticism. https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hare.org%2Fcomments%2Fcomment3.pdf Bob Calder 16:12, 24 October 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by B calder (talk • contribs)