[brightlancer]

> > It is based on multitudes of studies in psychology, neuroscience, sociology, evolutionary anthropology, and the like.

> In other words, no, you have no personal experience to back up your claims.

It's ironic that in a threat discussing leadership as a discipline, someone would make an appeal to "lived experience".

Unless someone here was with you, they don't know (nor do I) what your personal experience was. Similarly, you don't know everyone else's personal experiences. OTOH, we have these wonderful social sciences which go around and collect data from lots and lots of individuals, draw conclusions and publish them for other people to read and learn.

The data and conclusions might not be representative of your experience, but it's rubbish for you to handwave it away for your individual, subjective experience.

[pdonis]

> It's ironic that in a threat discussing leadership as a discipline, someone would make an appeal to "lived experience".

It's not ironic at all. Leadership itself is something that can't be studied purely from the outside.

> we have these wonderful social sciences

I don't share your rosy view of these so-called sciences. But that's not something we're going to resolve here.