Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It resonated right up until using the terminology "Fatal Flaw". From that point on I just found the term too distracting and it felt insulting.

If they called it anything else (eg. "unrealized vulnerability") it might have been more digestable.



FWIW, I agree that the terminology is unpleasant and reeks of internet language-isms like "the top 10 ways...". I feel like there is probably a book or MBA like class that teaches that this is the way to promote your articles online. I also agree that that language feels like it's for a lowest common denominator audience.

The book is pretty mechanical and straightforward and generally doesn't include language like that. The voice the author uses in the book is professional voice and not internet voice.

The one exception is this "fatal flaw" idea which is more or less the thesis of the authors book: Childhood emotional neglect results in feeling like if someone really knew you, they wouldn't like you. The author doesn't bring the term out in the first 10 chapters after which it is well founded.

The term itself is used to mean: "a character trait possessed by a hero that ultimately leads to their downfall." And through 10 chapters she did a pretty good job of showing that neglect does indeed lead to feelings which lead to "downfall" like consequences.


I’m being sincere here, is this satire?

It seems like you’ve found the fatal flaw in the fatal flaw definition.


Not the commenter, but “Fatal Flaw” is intentionally full of hyperbole, which arguably makes it unhelpful to use for psychological terminology.

> I’m being sincere here, is this satire?

Assuming the commenter wasn’t making satire then this is not a very polite way to put that, fyi.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: