I think this Beta in particular will have a strong base of users not being very knowledgeable of the board's topic. I'm quite an example as I actually study engineering.
I however think many of these did come following a different path and are often trying to get confirmation of their feelings about other people. (It's hard to describe all this generally, but to be fair to all, I'm refraining from posting actual examples)
The questions usually follow a pattern "Why are people so bad" addressing various common human traits - but seem to be strongly motivated by negative experience and actually getting a confirmation that they are the good guys and the other person is influenced by his/her psychological problem. But world's far from black and white and both of the sides could represent themselves by such a question - maybe actually the same one.
You might be right that there's nothing with asking question of everyday life. The problem I see is that such a question strongly implies the need for confirmation, often is unclear (addressing things that are individually relative) and does not motivate users to answer with reasonable explanation based on references.
But yet the question is easily sympathised with. The human traits are, when separated, not as unique as a human being with all of them combined. You'll get a lot of people casting an upvote on a question that is in my opinion a "rant in disguise" as is written in FAQ.
I actually too had caught myself trying to do this, to disguise a question about people who are troubling my everyday life and get an answer confirming that they are in control of irrational instincts and therefore creatures of lesser consciousness. I consider this wrong. Science should be motivated by curiosity, even though there are famous cases where it was motivated by some feelings (such as when Bell discovered phone while trying to get his wife hear things once again - I personally feel it's relevant that the feelings were of the kind we call positive).
Please share your thoughts.