So what you’re telling me is that I have a psychopathic cat and two psychopathic dogs in my own home!!! :eek:
At least I don’t have to worry about the fish, the snake, and the gecko- they never act like they even like me.
I have two psychopathic cats myself - the latest in a long line of psychopathic pets. On the other hand, I’ve never had an autistic pet.
To be clear, I don’t really believe in the pure behaviorist model.
Actually, I’ve long suspected the cat…
I have one who is psychotic. And I don’t mean in a “haha, my cat is a psycho! so crazy!” kind of way. I mean he:
- Takes pleasure in the misery of others. Selectively bullies another cat.
- Punishment is not a deterrent.
- Asshole, willingly
- If caught red handed, will give you the biggest “WTF are you gonna do, MFer?” look to you, then goes back doing it.
- Definitely not autistic - knows when we are watching and reacts accordingly
On the other hand, the other male is maybe Asperger’s :dubious: Not really but:
- Always friendly, but took forever to warm up.
- Affectionate, but refuses to sit on laps
- Autism has weird sensory things. Pet him on body? Ok. Chin? Sure. Cheeks? Absolutely! Top of head? WTF are you doing, human?
You don’t have to. There are many pure behaviorists out there who will believe their own BS for you.
As much as I hate the trend of people diagnosing TV characters as having Asperger’s Syndrome, I think Sheldon Cooper is clearly meant to be one. The producers deny it for some reason, but Sheldon has most of the markers you would look for. There are even several instances of Sheldon having to have other people’s reactions explained to him, and he also will occasionally rehearse proper emotional reactions to social interactions. If you notice, he also has trouble looking other people (besides his friends) in the eye, preferring to look out in the distance or at the ground.
Yes, in the earlier seasons, they had a lot of lines where he explained he wasn’t sure if the other person was being sarcastic, or funny, or serious. (“Was that sarcasm? I have trouble telling…”) He had to be told what the “appropriate social norms” for various functions were. After the Hollywood writers’ strike, it appears hey replaced the writers with ones who spent less time on this and even less time on real science, to the detriment of the show.
Sheldon does appear to have a form of Autistic Spectrum or Aspergers or whatever they call it these days. He seems to have trouble grasping the feelings of others or getting into his mind how others might react to what he says and does. The biggest disservice to people with Aspergers, I suppose, is to perpetuate the myth of idiot-savant - that somehow if you have this problem, you must be a genius at something.
But yes, I have never seen psychopath to imply that a person is a killer - just that they could do it without remorse. IANAP, what I have seen psychopathy described as, someone who is unable to empathize with others - unlike Sheldon, who can’t pick up on social clues, these type can - they just don’t care. So they can use these reactions to tailor their manipulations.
I mean, we’ve all done it. The polite nods and occasional interjections to a conversation we’re not really into… or saying just the right sort of thing to push someone’s buttons when we want to hurt them or get them mad. A psychopath simply does this all the time - fakes interest, learns how to do it well and manipulate others. Some are better than others, just like in any population, some are smarter than others.
Another way of putting it is a psychopath has no conscience. You will succeed at business, or war, or serial killing if you don’t lie awake at night worrying about who you’ve hurt or are going to hurt. It helps if all you care about is your own gratification, and other people’s feelings don’t stop you. It helps at business, too, if it does not bother you to take someone else’s money for less deliverables, or you don’t care about the 3,000 people you are going to lay off.
As for animals - they do have a alpha or submission mentality, and sometimes will imprint on the dominant person, even if it is not a cat or dog. There are plenty of stories of different animals identifying humans as “mama” or some such. A lot of dog behaviour is determined by whether they consider you leader of the pack or want to take you on for that position.
They deny it because if they say “Sheldon has Asperger’s/autism” then they are immediately locked into that with no creative options. By making him “quirky” (the official in-universe “diagnosis”), they can change him over time if they want without having people bitch about Asperger’s/autism not working that way, etc.
Misuse and abuse of a term can in fact lead so many people to conclude that it is not a real descriptor, that it loses effectiveness among the public.
But yes, I agree that psychopath does not necessarily mean killer. And being ruthlessly effective at crushing competition is not necessarily an indicator of psychopathy per se – it probably helps but is not a prerrequisite.
Right. Once [insert disorder here] is canonically established, you will have people from every chapter of the [insert disorder here] Association writing letters almost every week. As it stands, an ill-defined “Socially Clueless Personality” is fair game for setting in uncomfortable situations and for evolving the character at the writers’ discretion.
Also as md2000 points out, by not naming a condition they avoid the “aspie-savant” stereotype and instead they work with the still culturally acceptable “Brainy Nerd is Socially Awkward” stereotype.
I think sociopath. A psychopath is erratic. Impulsive. Violent. A sociopath has a more normal temperment. They can be violent of course in some cases, but they are more calculating, deliberate.
From the viewpoint of psychiatry, there’s no difference between psychopathy and sociopathy – the terms are identical. And it seems like you’re focusing on the popular “image” of psychopathy, i.e. your typical habitual criminal, with those who silently blend in to our society. Politicians and corporate executives, mainly – especially those who did get caught red-handed by the law, and subsequently claim their actions were justified for one silly reason or another. Or people like Scott Peterson, who went one step too far because he felt he could get away with murder (and almost did.)
I once read an interview with Jim Parsons where he mentioned that one of the other actors on TBBT – I want to say it was Johnny Galecki – had been reading Look Me in the Eye, a memoir by John Elder Robison about growing up with Asperger’s syndrome but not being diagnosed until adulthood. Parsons said the other actor recommended that he read the book because “This guy is Sheldon!”
I mention this because in Look Me in the Eye Robison talks about how some teachers and other authority figures told him they thought he was a psychopath and how he worried that he’d turn into a killer someday. But, as he explains in the book, his problem wasn’t that he didn’t care about other people, it was that he didn’t understand other people. He writes about wanting to make friends as a kid but struggling to figure out basic things about social interaction that seemed to come naturally to others. I think this specific example comes from one of Robison’s other books, but he said he was well into adulthood before he understood why people got angry with him for coming into the living room and immediately changing the TV channel to something he wanted to watch. It simply hadn’t occurred to him that if people were in the room and the TV was on then they were probably already watching something, or that not everyone would share his opinion that the program he wanted to watch was better than what they had on.
I would question whether creatures like Ridgeway or Bundy (Ted) could truly be described as having ASPD. The serial killers do not seem to be indifferent to the feelings of their victims, in fact, it seems like they thrive on the fear. It is almost like they are seeking intimacy through murder. Sociopaths/psychopaths typically seek ends that are unrelated to their victims, it is not clear to me that they need the victims per se, just whatever it is they want that those victims are standing in the way of them having.
I don’t know how most of them are diagnosed, but I’d think most fit the definition. But you’re right - serial killers are at elast something ASPD plus something else. Usually a really crappy childhood, which would screw up almost anyone, but you might need (something like) ASPD to go full serial killer.
Well, I just discovered that the Register still runs BOFH – looks kind of like current material – and it occurs to me, does he have a diagnosable condition, or is he just a piquish asshole, garnished with sadistic tendencies?
You found me out, I watch a lot of crime shows. Both are anti-social personality disorders. And ya, I discovered couple months ago it is the criminologists who like to separate the terms and not the shrinks.
The psychopath is erratic while the sociopath is in control.
The psychopath acts on impulse and often leaves clues, the sociopath schemes and takes care not to leave clues.
The psychopath takes excessive risks, the sociopath takes controlled risks.
The psychopath commits crimes of opportunity on impulse, the sociopath commits premeditated crimes…
And they regard Psychopaths as born and sociopaths as made…
Psst…see post #12.
I guess one other point I don’t recall being noted is that antisocial personalities are not frequently effective in society due to lack of handicapping of a conscience - generally their poor impulse control makes them more often failures (prison) than successes (CEOs). I would hazard a guess that most “antisocials/sociopaths/business successes” might be better considered as people whose moral compass started off WNL and then they progress to develop acquired narcissistic syndrome as their social environment became more distorted.