"'이 행동'하면 100% 복수합니다" 나르시시스트에게 절대 하면 안되는 행동 1위 l 책과사람 Ep. 19 배상훈 프로파일러 3부

0:00 Are there people who are attractive enough on the outside that you want to have a relationship with them, but you have to keep your guard up ? It is said that there is at least one person in every workplace who never tries to harm themselves and changes the situation to suit them . But in most cases, you will be criticized for something at work, but in reality, there are cases where that is distorted into a capable person in the company situation . So, should I hang out with these people ? Or should I distance myself from these people ? Hello, in such cases, how are you? This is announcer Kim Jae-won of Books and People, a time when books meet people and people meet books . There are people who seem attractive enough on the outside, but are actually dangerous on the inside. Is there any way to identify those dangerous people?

0:46 You are a first generation profiler. Let’s talk with Professor Bae Sang-hoon . hello? hello. yes. yes. Please give a greeting to our subscribers . hello. This is profiler Bae Sang-hoon. Nice to meet you. nice to meet you. Are there any other types of people who are attractive enough on the outside to be in a relationship with, but who we need to set some boundaries with ? A person who cosplays as a victim. Oh, really? There are definitely people like that. So, in other words, I was harmed in some way even though I was not the victim. You have to help me. In reality, this kind of situation actually makes people very tired. So the ending becomes very accurate. We know that it is good to be good people, generous people, kind people . In social life, we need a proper form of freezing and disconnection because we need to properly disconnect from people who cosplay as victims, because they are trying to gain something by using it

1:38 . There are terms that we come across through movies, dramas, and news reports. I got used to it. Words like psychopath, sociopath, and even narcissist have emerged these days . How can we even define this ? Is it possible to tell the difference ? Psychopaths are cold-hearted, indifferent, and psychopaths are like those who are related to others or human users. Narcissists are highly self-centered, so rather than being defined by the fact that they are narcissists themselves, they are tied together with other things. So, there are many cases where a person is a social passer-by and a narcissist, but it is actually difficult to say that only narcissists exist. Well, everyone has self-centeredness now, and there are

2:25 many cases where they are some kind of being who does something with it. So these days, we often talk about social pass and narcissism together. And psychopaths now tend to be viewed somewhat independently as cold-hearted and indifferent . You could also see it as a temperamental tendency. Then, there are such people around us . Well, even if they aren't psychopaths, there are definitely sociopaths and narcissists around us right now. There are so many. Even. So now, every workplace has at least one, and everyone who looks at the workplace committee will testify to that. yes. That's why we always have it on our team. So, they say they are on a team, but I don't know if it is that team, but anyway, if there are several teams in this big office, it is actually their team, but they are here and they talk like this. Then you have to hang out with these people . Or should I distance myself from these people

3:11 ? You must not give the impression that you are keeping a certain distance between the two. Then it becomes even more dangerous. Right? Because if you keep your distance, it turns into hostility and hostility and aggression, so it's just hanging out, but the expression that this is now a bit appropriate is saying that the best way is to keep a bit of distance and not get any closer . The worst thing is that I will make that person human. This is absolutely unacceptable. I will try to change it. yes. It can never be done, it is an endless undertaking. It's your choice. It's a really bad idea to say that I corrected that person because that person is bad, and it's something that people with broad opinions should be careful about because it's not explained. That's why social relationships often break down . So why do you intervene? In some cases, it even goes as far as filing a complaint

3:58 . Let's maintain appropriate relationships while keeping boundaries at this level. Then it seems like you dislike me a little bit, but I like this feeling the most, that you don't like me that much . If you want the other person to feel that way, then Social Pass is a human being, a human user, and you said that Ghost is a person who has a tendency for egoism and acts self-centeredly. Are there any specific behavioral characteristics? The common thing we can distinguish is that we now try not to suffer losses . But in some situations, isn't the relationship actually transactional to some extent in corporate life or social life? If I do this, I'll do this next time, but it's like a take on the name donation . Even if it's not exactly a big deal, is n't there a general consensus on the purpose? yes. Since we made some concessions this time, it is common sense to expect that we will do the same thing next time without saying anything, but what you said

4:44 this time is different from what you said then . This time, if I don't give in, then in the next step, the other person will come up with another reason for not giving in, and if this happens several times, I will realize that the other person has no intention of giving in after all. When something happens in the department, do it this time. There are always friends who say they'll do it next time, but then the next time they say, "Oh, this time I'll do it a little better," and then they make up some other excuse and get away with it . It's about changing the situation to your own self-centered way by making excuses for something else. In such cases, it is generally said that there is a tendency for social passing. In fact, it may happen once or twice, but if it happens repeatedly, you should be a bit suspicious . They never seek to harm themselves, but rather attack others from the perspective of harm. There are beings who change situations to suit themselves. But in that case, in most cases, you will be criticized at work,

5:30 but in reality, there are cases where that is distorted into a capable person in the company situation . That could be the case. Because anyway, you lose and there is no penalty. Then you can get promoted first . So now, if you look at it, there are many cases where you go the fastest among your peers or go up by eating this, so there are cases where social passes are characteristic. And now he's angry that his influence is being encroached upon. If I were to be invaded even a little, then as I was talking now, something suddenly appeared. In that situation, I would have been upset. So, if my space is invaded, which is usually a mixture of egocentrism and social path, and even if I'm talking hard and someone changes the subject or interrupts and interrupts me, and I get so upset that I say, "What's wrong?", then I should be suspicious. In

6:16 most cases, that point is something like going overboard or something like that, or something like that, or something like that, or something like that, but then they get serious. He looks embarrassed and flustered. I think many people will immediately think of that person . That person was in business. [Music] And now, when I listen to my friends who are executives at companies, they say that their subordinates sometimes lie . At first I thought it was like that, but then he started telling obvious lies . Should I be suspicious again ? There may be lies that are told out of necessity . So, there are cases where people lie in awkward situations even though they know they will get caught, and in those cases, even if they are superiors or colleagues, they sometimes excuse it and let it slide . But using that, the

7:02 same thing goes into Sosipae again . In most cases, if you make an excuse and say, "I won't do that next time," or explain the situation and move on, it's even worse if you use that to your advantage and get the next stage as your only opportunity . Now, normal people can lie too . But when that lie worked, oh, this time I was lucky and it worked. I must never do this again. This is a normal person. Or, after some time had passed, the manager said, " I actually had no choice but to lie to you at that time ." This is also an ordinary person. But , uh, if our manager finds my lie convincing and tries to lie again, you should be suspicious. And then, instead, they attack the person who excused it. Why did you do that then? Oh, that's what it was like back then. Yes, that's right. There are cases where they actually get angry and say things like, "It's changing in time." In this case, it's dangerous. It's a little scary.

7:48 But such people definitely exist. Why are you doing that? In that situation, I try to turn the situation around by crying or beating myself up so that I don't suffer any losses . It seems like this won't be reversed, but society does this depending on the situation. Then again, that person starts to inform the situation in a non-verbal way without it being on his back. But because these cases often occur, it often happens that fair and good people suffer losses. Oh, and in the case of people who are self-centered, there is a tendency for everyone to want to accommodate themselves . But that only happened once or twice. If this happens repeatedly, do you realize that you have this tendency ? I know to some extent. But we interpret it again from a self-centered perspective. I

8:33 think I have this much ability and I can do this. For someone like me, this is okay . For someone like me, this is okay. And I'm going to get out of here anyway. In the case of special ceremonies, it's about wrapping yourself . Hey, I contributed most of this authority . This is especially true when you have this kind of pride . But that's a delusion. Someone has to wake them up from their delusions, but the problem is that they attack the person who wakes them up. By attacking the person's weaknesses, you create a situation where people don't feel comfortable. Then, you become more and more satisfied with it and this becomes a normal pattern. So, the people who warn a lot to avoid it are not wrong at all. But sometimes, those people are usually kind. But there are times when, in a critical situation, he

9:19 speaks with such a serious expression that you wonder if he is really the right person . The step button won't press. Is this also a tendency? Don't you usually know? Because they know they have to hide themselves, they often try to cover up, especially to new employees or people they don't know well, but if something touches their interests even a little, they feel a slight push. This is the same context as acting on your own. Why do people like that exist? When someone is a mood person, when they are in a good mood, they think everything will be fine, but when they are in a bad mood, they get angry and make a fuss . I think this kind of state is usually portrayed similarly to a mood disorder. So, it's not necessarily a mental illness, but there are cases where people

10:04 with such a mood disorder intentionally do it because they are afraid of how other people will react when they explode and feel that something is dangerous. So, just make some bread and don't let anyone touch it. So now, while it may actually be a mood disorder, it can also be another reaction to use people's reactions to further elevate oneself . They also seem to have a detailed strategy . Usually, many people say that someone is smart, but it's not that they are smart; it's that they are good at interpreting situations. Oh, you have a good ability to interpret and utilize situations. Leading in a direction that is advantageous to you . We usually call it being cunning. He's a cunning person. Not a smart person. Now that you say it's cunning, I completely understand. As I mentioned earlier about lies, there is

10:49 no trick to distinguishing lies. Is it possible to distinguish them by things like facial expressions or tone of voice? People say that you can catch it from certain expressions or things like that, as in the drama called "The Light of the Mid", but in reality, that's a bit of a stretch . However, there are cases where when telling a lie, one acts in a way that is not interpreted according to the situation . What I mean is, actions that are not done now, actions that are not done before, such as touching something, or in the case of Clinton, touching his nose, these are different from normal situations, so it is said that he appears to have a compensatory psychological behavior to compensate for this with his own actions. I don't know what that is. Because it's different for everyone. That's what people like us are looking for, but it doesn't necessarily show up commonly . Some people didn't show up . hmm . It's something you wouldn't notice unless you looked closely

11:35 . That's why profilers call it behavioral de-lithography because they analyze behavior to find lies, not through the person's words . In a typical organization, is n't the only way to find vulnerabilities by simply asking roundabout questions? When you pray over and over again, your weaknesses are revealed. Actually, I'm saying something different from what I said 20 minutes ago. That's the general way to find out, so what is the true nature of a psychopath or a narcissist? That's because I don't really know what it looks like. So, if they had their true colors, they wouldn't express it like that. We usually have onions. What is the true nature of an onion? Then, if you look at it all, there is nothing. But is n't it an onion? This isn't just a social mask . So, they wear a social mask, but

12:22 within that, there are innate elements and learned elements. As I said earlier, psychopaths are 6 to 2 to 2, but for posers, it's a bit the opposite. About 2 to 6 to 2. hmm . There is a temperamental heritage and there are two temperamental things. And it is often said that the situational aspect, which is often called the sixfold path, is not exactly symmetrical, but that the context and social influence are much greater . It appears that when such people go to workshops in organizations, they now show a different side of themselves. In everyday life, in situations and environments where it's easy to understand, I thought, "Well, that could just happen," but now, when you're together for 24 or 36 hours in a completely different situation,

13:08 different tendencies emerge. Would some observation be necessary then? It's not easy to hide the behavioral observations I made earlier. When we talk about someone, we talk for four or eight hours, so we make them talk endlessly . Then, usually after about 4 hours, there will be nothing left to lie about . If you want to lie, you have to remember what kind of lies you told in the past, but if you keep telling similar stories, you will end up getting confused yourself . You will run out of scenarios. yes. They say that's about 4 hours. So now it's the same thing. The Wonkshop mask actually has limitations in showing the appearance of its own mask . in fact. So are they also afraid that their true selves will be revealed? No

13:53 fear. When your nothingness is revealed, you have to make excuses for it, and when you make excuses, you have to do something else, lie again, and that's the situation where you have to do it to defend yourself. Oh, as you mentioned briefly earlier, there is such a person within the organization, and most of the members agree that he would do that . So how should I treat him? Usually in such cases, you have to reach a certain level of agreement with the person above you . As long as you don't cause any major accidents here, you will be recognized as a member of the organization. But what we need is someone who can control that person . But in our daily lives, we can usually just avoid it, but in an organization, we have to work together and achieve work results together, so in that case,

14:39 rather than having equal agreement, it is necessary for the superior to have a certain degree of control. Inform the person in charge of the writing of his condition and assign him responsibility for control . Is this the right way to approach it? That's because he is a person with a great sense of self-interest, so he is impatient to the point of being mean to those who need to look good to him . Now, you said that you apply certain limits within the organization, but if someone causes physical harm to another member of the group or causes significant damage to the performance of the organization, then you have to take action anyway. Yes, that's right. Well, whatever it is, whether it's disciplinary action or legal action, but other things don't really cross the line there . Because I

15:26 know that I will get tired if I get out of there. I know that myself. Because I know it myself, I maintain a certain level of integrity by taking criticism but also achieving results . At an organizational level, yes, but personally, I can't stand that guy. I want to cut off my hands. Is this a good method? But now, if you openly cut ties, you will be attacked. So, there is no need to do it out of necessity, you just need to show that I am not an easy person . Oh, just show me that messing with me isn't much fun. There's no need to go any further than that. I know you are this kind of person . But I won't tie up anything that harms me. As long as it's not insignificant, I can harm you to the extent that it's okay . I will change the line above that.

16:12 Absolutely not. That person, what is it? Because he is a person within the organization. Then, whether it's the company president or a manager, it's there because they need something . In that case, there is no need to go that far, but people with good intentions feel bad for that person and wish that that person would become a part of the organization, so they may feel like they can change if they just give them a little bit of information. But it never changes. It doesn't change because if it did, the previous job would have changed. I didn't even see that kind of appearance. It won't be shown, and that's the appearance of some entity that has a vested interest . So, an appropriate distance is that important in social life . As you said before, if I warn him and he harms me, I will not bind him either. I've actually been hurt by

16:57 keeping my distance in these types of boundary-breaking relationships . Oh, but if I react again and provoke them, I feel like it will cause more damage. How should I deal with this? So now I have to estimate the extent of the damage and see if I can overcome this level of damage. Or, if you think of it as just tuition, it 's usually best to just cover it up. But if you do it this way, it's not too cowardly, but in reality, in a company or in social relationships, there is no such thing as defeat or defeat. However, if the damage goes beyond what I can handle, I need to formally raise the issue. That's a given. But there are cases where bad people usually do well, so it is

17:43 said that the person should go up to the top so that he can be notified. It's really tiring to respond to something that seems big at first, or something just above that level . So, this is exactly the kind of relationship that is usually created when someone is bullied at work and ends up suing because of it. If this exploitation continues, is it possible that it could lead to something like abduction or even a more serious crime? In that kind of relationship, the scariest thing is when the company accuses you of embezzlement or something else . More than anything else. Because they are trying to blame others for their mistakes, and especially now, the most dangerous thing is things like sexual crimes. The most dangerous part is blaming someone for a sexual crime or something like that. Except for that part, it's actually better to keep a bit of distance, but if they come in that way, you absolutely cannot tolerate it

18:28 . But what's really funny is that if you do that, it works across the board. And then I type it again appropriately. yes. I'm not saying that it's always like that, but there are often cases where you actually agree to a certain percentage . That's why we're used to it because we always bend over. If you respond formally, there may be a way out. If you understand up to that point, you might be able to find a way. So how would you define desirable human relationships? As a profiler. I know that even Socrates couldn't do it . I think a desirable relationship would be one where both parties empathize with each other, have affection for each other without keeping a distance, but also maintain privacy . All relationships have boundaries. And now, in conclusion, everyone's appearance and inner self are

19:15 different. It can be different. But keep this in mind: There are far more good, honest, healthy, and liveable people in the world than bad people . In other cases, I'm just talking about the dangers you might run into, but there are a lot more good people in the world. Just keep that in mind. Even though we call it barley rice, only 10% of it is barley. yes. great. Thank you for your warm words today . I heard it well. There are people who shouldn't be fooled by appearances. Because their true intentions are different. But if you think about it the other way around, they are also the reason why we should join hands and live together . I hope that the people around you will take another look with a more considerate heart . All the emotions in the world, all the knowledge in the world, books and life, books and

20:02 people, this was Ana Kim Jae-won. Thank you for joining us today. thank you Thank you, sir. [music]