Here’s a thought.
Is psychopathy a basic, unaltered human condition?
Please nobody answer who, after reading the word ‘psychopath’ thinks ‘mindless serial killers’.
These days many of us are aware that psychopaths walk among us. In fact, it has been said that 1 in every 100 of us are psychopaths, or at the very least have psychopathic traits.
Those traits can be; lack of empathy, lack of ability to follow o ‘life plan’, unreliability.
I was thinking that these so-called psychopathic traits, and others, are traits that i think people are probably generally born with, and that it is learned behaviour that subsequently causes these traits to diminish.
Even the lack of fear thing, I know that people who know about this stuff put a lot down to an abnormality in the amygdala, but if an individual was never civilized, could he/she be considered a pychopath?
Just to address this one point: Learned behavior can also exacerbate these traits.
I’m skeptical that anyone who is otherwise normal is truly a psychopath.
Most of the early research (which is some of the only research) identified people who were simply impulsive, having less impulse control
Someone who genuinely is incapable of caring about another living being? Difficult to believe. The only thing that’s really identified is the behaviors, so what could be happening is as mentioned above is just impulse control problems, people who have been burned in life so have trouble emotionally investing in/trusting other people, etc.
that being said I’d say yes children start out mostly caring about themselves, and desires for property and food are innate.
If you assume human attributes generally fall into a range, why would little empathy be difficult to buy into? Seems like it would be more surprising if there weren’t outliers.
The Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders does not recognize a “psychopathic” disorder as such. Those we call “psychopaths” have an “antisocial personality disorder”: A pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others. It does state, “This pattern has also been referred to as psychopathy, sociopathy, or dyssocial personality disorder.”
Please cite any of these so-called “facts” that you wish to discuss. For example, it has been said by who that 1 in every 100 of us are psychopaths?
What you’ve described is sociopathology, or antisocial personality disorder. Many come from abusive households.
The problems start early, but so did the abuse.
At least one of us understands the difference between “potentiality” and “reality”.
Also, to be somewhat pedantic, it doesn’t say that 1 in 100 have psychopathic traits, either.
It says 1 in 100 test positive for having at least a certain number of traits associated with psychopathy, meaning quite a few more people than 1 in 100 almost certainly have at least some traits associated with psychopathy. That doesn’t make any of them psychopaths on its own.
Maybe not psychopaths but I definitely feel that sociopaths rule the world. Probably 99 in every 100 at the top of the corporate ladder or in politics are straight up sociopaths. IMO mankind has never been in a battle between good and evil, we’ve been in a battle between good and sociopaths. Sociopaths claw their way into positions of power and subjugate everyone else.
Czarcasm, if you were to correctly read my post i did not mention anything as ‘fact’, merely something that ‘has been said’.
I was trying to make the point that most of us now recognize that there are many functioning psychopaths within society, something that interests me. I do not pretend to know much on the subject, so please forgive me ‘Czarcasm’ for any future posts that do not contain accurate info.
This is complete nonsense. They are driven, but calling them sociopaths pretty much reduces the meaning of the term to people who achieve things.
Why exactly does this matter, if you understand the general point i was trying to make? It could be some bloke at a bar, it was a glib statement used to make a point.
It matters who said it if we are to consider it as a possible statement of fact.
Well, according to this research, the incidence of psychopathy among CEOs is about 4%, about 4 times higher than the general population.
Cite:
A lack of empathy comes up repeatedly in the article, which is discussing a book. Essentially the point is that capitalism rewards some psychopathic traits. Lack of empathy, a need for stimulation, being prone to boredom and seeking new challenges. Al Dunlap is mentioned as being very psychopathic. After learning more about Steve Jobs lately, I wonder where he would have fit in on the scale.
I never asked for it to be considered a statement of fact, please read my previous post again. I think you want to reconsider using the word ‘we’, I think other people have read and understood my post as intended.
Nestle CEO is case in point. Very scary dude, I get the vibe he has bodies buried in his back yard.
Psychopath.
Sociopath.
Anti-social personality.
Maybe we can include Malignant Narcissist?