There are human beings among us, a sort of a dangerous subspecies, who – whether through nature or nurture – have become sociopaths. Some call them psychopaths, but they are nothing like the paranoid recluse Mr. Bates in Psycho. They are charming, personable, seemingly just like you or me, sometimes very successful, captivating, often very smart… and they pass for sane, moral human beings. They are neither.
The sociopaths are quite numerous in many societies. This “disorder” is estimated at 4% in the United States. About as frequent as color blindness. Both genders are represented, but women less. They are not recognizable by any quirks or special marks. They can, however, be known through their behaviors. These are the kind of people who leave a path of destruction and pain behind them without a pang of conscience, and cause far more harm to individuals and to society than their prevalence would suggest. They are overrepresented among the criminal subset, but most criminals are not sociopaths, and most sociopaths are not criminals. That means that most of the sociopaths live among us as neighbors, friends, coworkers and family members.
Their moral disorder is at present incurable, and most of them are not interested in being cured. They typically hold the rest of us in contempt: we are the suckers with feelings and a conscience. They prey on us without remorse. They study us carefully so they can mimic our ways. Isn’t it about time to study them back, and learn to recognize them so we can protect ourselves and our loved ones?
What they are like:
- hollow, dead inside; they have a frozen core that human warmth cannot reach
- they are unable to feel normal human feelings; what they show is practiced imitation
- most remarkable by their inability to empathize (if a person does feel empathy, even if they fit some of these other points, they are not a sociopath)
- they resent being stigmatized by moral people, and enjoy getting back at us
- they harm people they profess to love
- they often harm without reason, except for the thrill of domination, winning and watching people hurt
- they suffer from a sense of profound loneliness & boredom, and may self-medicate with TV, alcohol and drugs
- they generally recognize themselves for what they are before the age of 10, and can recognize others of their kind readily
- their charm is superficial, their emotions shallow
- they do not suffer from delusion or irrational thinking
- but will sometimes attack via crazy-making or “gaslighting”, using nonsensical ideas just to confuse us and make us question our own sanity [The word comes from the film Gaslight (1944) where a predatory husband manipulates his wife into near insanity]
- may show concern about getting found out; often, they are control freaks and guilt trippers
- they are unreliable and feel no compulsion to keep promises or rules; they love chaos
- they are glib and insincere: these smooth, superb, habitual and inveterate liars and manipulators never fess up unless you stick their face in the evidence, and sometimes not even then
- their ongoing deceptions impose on others a false reality made of distortions and fabrications
- they lack, along with conscience, any sense of shame, guilt or remorse
- they have poor memory and do not learn from experience; even though they profess to have occasional insights, they lose them, forcing their partners into a dreary vicious circle of revisiting the same issues over and over
- they are pathologically egocentric and unable to love, and notably unresponsive in intimate relationships
- chronically crabby and irritable
- they do not accept responsibility for the harm they do
- boastful, huge egos, grandiose sense of self-worth
- typically they do not have a life plan or a direction
A caveat: a list like this can only point in a direction, and cannot diagnose. It is also important to keep in mind that most sociopaths lead relatively normal lives, and often have much to offer; they tend to be smart and entertaining and talented in a variety of ways. They are dangerous but not “all bad.” Societies that recognize the signs and subtly disadvantage anti-social behaviors have fewer antisocial people.
How to recognize the charming predator:
1) Listen carefully for details of their stories; if you hear deception, check it out, don’t ignore it. Check their life stories and references.
2) Listen to your deep sense: do you want to trust this individual with intimacy or secrets? Or is there a little voice of caution and warning deep inside?
3) Watch out for the pity play (or getting taken advantage of on account of your compassion and sympathy). These folks love it when we feel sorry for them and try to help, and so often present themselves as hurt by forces over their head. Do not fall for it.
4) Look for genuine signs of empathy for other people’s pain.
If this is a family member, have them tested. Psychiatrists have useful questionnaires, and brain scans can identify abnormal processing of emotion. The official labels for these people fluctuate, and descriptions of narcissistic, borderline, or anti-social personality disorders have significant overlap with sociopaths.
How to protect yourself and your loved ones:
(adapted from The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout, 2005)
- Accept that some people just do not have conscience. Not all people are basically good.
- Go with your instincts rather than deferring to the role this person is playing (animal lover, doctor, knows all the right people, etc.)
- In a new relationship, practice the “rule of three”: one lie or broken promise can be a misunderstanding, two can be a serious mistake. But three says you are dealing with a liar. Cut your losses and get out.
- People in authority can be sociopaths. If given instructions that go against your moral code, refuse to follow. Get help and outside support.
- Suspect flattery. It’s a good sign of a manipulator.
- Don’t confuse the fear of a menacing individual with respect.
- Do not join the game: trying to outsmart him, to analyze him, to banter with him. Or her. It never works.
- The best way to protect yourself is avoidance and refusal of contact. Focus on standing up for your own life, not pushing against the psychopath. They are better at hitting back than you are.
- Reserve your pity for the deserving unfortunate. Do not waste your help, money and resources on a sociopath. Giving another chance is for people who possess a conscience.
- Never agree to cover for a sociopath, or to help them conceal their true character.
- Defend your soul. We are not a failure. We have a conscience, and we do love.
- Heal hurt and damage through learning to recognize them, warning other people, and exchanging support with others who have been hurt. Doing the right thing is balm for the soul.
Reading up:
-
Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work by Paul Babiak and Robert D. Hare (2007)
-
Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us by Robert D. Hare (1999)
September 19, 2010 at 1:09 pm
Excellent post leavergirl. Although the figure of 4% may be somewhat meaningful, it is problematic how it could be established. Think about it. These folks are adept at not being discovered. Also, our culture itself encourages and supports much of their MO and persona. I don’t know if our questionable psychiatric establishment has a category for “marginally psychosocial” or not, but it should. I see this syndrome’s tentacles spreading throughout the world.
It is interesting that if I express these ideas in a random group, several folks will think (maybe not express) “He seems to be a little off on this stuff.” We would rather not look too deeply into the dark side of our culture or ourselves.
Another fascinating phenomenon is the tendency to accuse one pointing to the dark side of our life of actually being the cause of or promoting that darkness by the very act of pointing it out. Some bizarre magical thinking, but not uncommon in my experience.
A great post, and well worth thinking deeply on. Has the nightmare of civilization made us all crazier than we care to realize? Remember, the first step is to look the Devil steadily in the eye without flinching….
September 19, 2010 at 1:22 pm
Thank you, Mike. It comes from the heart… something I wrote a while back for us all to learn from. We need to get savvy!
I don’t know how good the 4% figure is… but the sources also say that in some societies (Taiwan, I think) the numbers are less than 1%.
When adding up all the anti-social types and their *helpers,* enablers, and coat-tail-riders, the figure I think would be much higher.
My opinion may be a bit harsh, but those who refuse to allow the possibility of such warped humans out there, are in a category of enablers as well…. they get in the way of this information becoming common; they get in the way of the warning.
September 19, 2010 at 4:15 pm
Hey leavergirl,
thanks for that. Makes me re-evaluate a couple of work relationships that I had. One I spotted pretty early on, the other a build up over a long time. Am older now (but just because you have experiences doesn’t mean you’re wiser of course! You can learn no lessons, or the wrong ones, or fail to apply lessons learnt…)
Anyway, recently the Financial Times Magazine had a feature on people with narcissistic behaviour disorder.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/5ff67be2-b636-11df-a784-00144feabdc0,dwp_uuid=a712eb94-dc2b-11da-890d-0000779e2340.html
Hope it is of interest…
September 19, 2010 at 4:18 pm
“If this is a family member, have them tested.”
You know that Voigt-Kampf test of yours? Did you ever take that test yourself?
September 19, 2010 at 4:24 pm
Smc, I moved your comment over. I am sorry but I have no further information on the tests used. I thought it was an MRI. There is a film made of a narcissist/psychopath by the name of Sam Vaknin, called I, Psychopath. It shows several of the tests they put him through in Germany. It’s available on the web.
September 19, 2010 at 4:34 pm
Thanks for the link, Marc! Amazing how that Vaknin manages to stay in the limelight. He’s made a profession out of being warped, and he is damn good at it.
September 19, 2010 at 4:44 pm
Mike Said:
Too true. It’s like some upside down, crazy-fucked-up Darwinism. Usually the culture would ‘select’ for, and reward behaviour that strengthened social bonds within the group. As creatures who evolved to live in tribes, this would represent the most ‘adaptive’ state of affairs. Instead ours actively fosters destabilising, self-seeking, destructive behaviour. WTF??!? It’s breathtaking really. Can’t go extinct soon enough in my honest opinion…
I always remember something I heard probably via Ran Prieur about how sane societies deal with sociopaths. I tracked it down to a Scientific American article, ‘What “Psychopath” Means‘:
I’d like to point this out as an option to keep in mind, especially when the ‘cut losses and run’ alternative isn’t available – eg: when they run your fucking country (cough cough)
Please pardon my French
Ian
September 19, 2010 at 6:22 pm
“Usually the culture would ‘select’ for, and reward behaviour that strengthened social bonds within the group. As creatures who evolved to live in tribes, this would represent the most ‘adaptive’ state of affairs. Instead ours actively fosters destabilising, self-seeking, destructive behaviour. WTF??!?”
Ah, Ian, you gladden my heart. That is the puzzle at the very heart of the problem of power. I gotta start writing about it. So much to say, so little time! And thank you for the Yupik story. Assassination has always been the true and tried method of tribal societies when all other methods failed. But… they had lots of other ways…
September 20, 2010 at 1:30 pm
(Sorry, that was me – logged in under the old blog.)
Yeah, probably important to emphasise that last part… Rehab is always better than getting rid of the ‘problem’ forever. I guess this would hinge on the question of whether reform is possible (or worth the effort?) with sociopaths. The SA article said that:
… though I don’t think I’ve seen any examples of this in my life. The important thing as I see it: like with the law that living organisms give back more to the ecology than they take from it, members of the tribe should make a net positive contribution, otherwise they’re not worth the air they breathe (or, more practically, the food they eat).
I thought a little about this ‘problem of power’ today, especially how such a backwards situation could ever have arisen. I’m seeing it as a revolution – the agricultural revolution where our ancestral culture apparently chose to ‘flaunt the law of life at every point’ (Quinn, approx.) Why did some people feel such a deep need to rebel against ways of life that had provided for them for 100s of 1,000s of years? To rebel against their own biological natures, against life itself? I don’t really know. Maybe these antisocial attitudes arose through a lifeway people fell into by accident. Either way I feel the counter-revolution is long overdue
I’ve been reading a book by Christopher Hill, World Turned Upside Down, about the various groups like the Diggers and Levellers in revolutionary England. It seemed to me the book might better be titled ‘World Turned The Right Way Round’ – these impulses to egalitarianism, sexual & religious freedom, basic land rights etc. seem to spring from a deep understanding of the way we were meant to live, ultimately pointing back to our evolutionary heritage of 2-3 million years living in a way that suited us…
I like identifying as a counter-revolutionary. It turns the tables and makes the ‘respectable’ leaders of this culture look like the real petulant, immature social deviants
Hope you’re still okay with so much thinking-out-loud!
cheers,
Ian
September 20, 2010 at 4:36 pm
While I do agree that unhelpfully disruptive (sociopathic in the literal sense) people need to be contained and warned about etc etc, the flip side is that if everyone agrees all the time, you have no ‘ideodiversity,’ to coin a terrible neologism. And where does the innovation come from? There’s that famous 100th monkey fable – apparently one of the young females innovated on how to wash food more easily, and pretty soon everyone adopted it except the male elders).
Oh, and Leavergirl – the earlier comment about Voigt-Kampf is a quote from the Ridley Scott film “Blade Runner”. It’s something we sci-fic geeks do…
September 22, 2010 at 4:41 pm
Hi Leavergirl, Mike, Jay D and other regulars whose ideas have helped me but whose individual identities haven’t penetrated my thick skull.
Does the internet encourage/amplify sociopaths? I know every new technology (electric light, radio, TV etc) comes with fears of societal breakdown and moral panic, but isn’t the Internet, with its anonymity and low entry costs perfectly suited to the empty narcissists?
And yes, this empty narcissist is wanting you to visit a blog post…
http://dwighttowers.wordpress.com/2010/09/22/trolls-trolls-trolls/
September 23, 2010 at 11:20 am
I got hauled off a couple of days ago to have my appendix snipped off. Yikes. Happy to report there seemed to be no sociopaths visible at the hospital… even the food was top-notch! So… soon to be back.
September 23, 2010 at 2:13 pm
May I be the first to welcome you back! Glad you had an uneventful hospital stay.
I wrote, half tongue in cheek, about this subject – sociopaths, not hospitals – in one of my contributions to “the Future We Deserve” An essay called, Zombies & Vampires, Oh My!
It’s a serious subject. We’ve been involved in the comments around Derrick Jensen’s recent article in Orion Magazine:
http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/discuss/5838/P168/
This does get at the root of the question of Power. Sociopaths have no qualms about taking and using power, while those of us attempting to resist these urges – I don’t know how b&w these tendencies really are, especially in contemporary society… – are squeamish and full of reasonable equivocations about the nature of power and its legitimate avenues and methods.
Counter-intuitively, I think there is a delirious ecstasy to be found in a total renunciation of power and complete acceptance of whatever can or will be done to one. This seems as much an abrogation of responsibility as it is to covet control and supreme power. Using these boundaries from which insanity calls us, there must be some other way to course between these extremes. To be capable and just, or at least to be willing to always keep those goals in mind.
Glad you’re well!
September 23, 2010 at 4:39 pm
Hi Leavergirl and Antonio,
- also glad your appendix is out and you are out of hospital!!
- “Counter-intuitively, I think there is a delirious ecstasy to be found in a total renunciation of power and complete acceptance of whatever can or will be done to one. This seems as much an abrogation of responsibility as it is to covet control and supreme power.”
Hegel’s Master-Slave dialectic is good on this. And I think yes, there are some who want to be coddled/cossetted, ordered around. The whole BDSM community seems to cater to that, no? And NGOs and lobbyists etc as the political equivalent?! And also people who refuse to take responsibility for their fuck-ups [these are found in vast numbers in ‘left’ and ‘alternative’ scenes, where a willingness to tolerate ambiguity and joy slides into an inability to set boundaries of acceptable performance/behaviour. But this is an old bugbear of mine!!
Best wishes to you all
Dwight Towers
September 23, 2010 at 5:45 pm
Ian, there is no rehab for psychopaths. Current psychiatry does not have that sort of knowledge. What I meant is that tribal societies have graduated ways to discourage psychopathic behavior, and indeed, many psychopaths live productive lives. They are a danger though, because of their serious deficits.
“psychopaths may benefit as much as nonpsychopaths from psychological treatment. Even if the core personality traits of psychopaths are exceedingly difficult to change, their criminal behaviors may prove more amenable to treatment”
This is quite misleading on part of that article. Criminal psychopaths who are given treatment often use it to improve their predatory skills. They tend to run circles around shrinks. Of course, if you retrain a psychopath thief to be a well paid computer programmer, that may lead them away from a life of crime, as it would any other person.
Most psychopaths are not criminals.
I love your thoughts on the problem of power and levellers, but will have to address them another time. That book sounds very interesting. Can you tell more?
Marc, interesting comments about innovation and ideas. Do you figure that if the 4% of psychopaths vanished in a puff of smoke, the rest of us would be bereft of ideas and innovation? Really curious what made you take that train of thought. (Also, the remaining 96% of us would still disagree vehemently, no? All that would be eliminated would be people without empathy.)
Does the internet encourage psychopaths? Mmm… I think civilization, and particularly modernity, does. The internet does encourage trolls, but that’s another species of pest.
September 24, 2010 at 12:16 am
Hi all,
What I was trying (perhaps not so well!) to get at was that the tools (exclusion/purgatory/filter mechanisms) that are necessary for dealing with psychopaths can also be turned against ideological opponents. A la Soviet Union (I am conscious here that I am talking about things that I have only read in books while you have experienced in your own life!), one of the ways of dealing with dissidents was to label them psychiatrically unwell. That abuse of medical labelling is also a risk in smaller groups, no? And the chilling effect. I was drifting off-topic/speculating on the possible ramifications of excluding the relentlessly disruptive, because I wonder if the distinction between ‘narcissistically and unproductively disruptive’ and ‘trying to expose flaws/innovate/get folks out of ruts’ disruptive (what I have called transruptive elsewhere) wouldn’t get ignored if it suited the needs of those with the hegemonic power. Rapiers can become broadswords, and broadswords can have a chilling effect!
All best
“Dwight Towers”
September 24, 2010 at 5:53 am
Of course. Sorry for being dense. When I began to think through the psychopathy thing, the problem of witch hunts was on my mind too.
Let me see if a short answer makes sense to you.
When you encounter a small child, do you hand her a book of matches? Not if you have a shred of sanity left.
When you encounter a psychopath, do you hand him power over other human beings? Not if you have a shred of sanity left.
Most psychopaths are otherwise normal people leading fairly normal lives. They learn to compensate for their deficits. The key is for others to recognize them, and to have in place effective boundaries. Maybe there is an evolutionary reason why human societies have a small percentage of people without empathy and conscience. I have a hypothesis about this…
To put it another way, sane societies have graduated sanctions against truly disruptive people. A sort of peer-to-peer balance rather than a crackdown. Insane societies let them run rampant. And go on witch hunts when it suits those in power. (?)
September 24, 2010 at 6:02 am
Antonio, this does poke at the root of the problem of power. Psychopaths and power should not mix. Empathic people are also vulnerable to the dark side of power, but psychopaths are a shoo in. They have no defenses against the corruption. (You say they have no qualms; yes, of course. They do not function within qualms.)
Perhaps some people are so discouraged by all this that they renounce all power… and leave it to its abusers. Purity beckons, eh? I think of it this way: power corrupts. But lack of power corrupts as well.
September 24, 2010 at 9:31 am
Hello again, leavergirl.
With ‘rehab’ I was referring more to the informal ways a community might succeed in redirecting the negative energies of even the most disturbed individuals. I’m a little hazy on the details of how this might happen, though, so would be interested to read any examples you have of these ‘graduated ways to discourage psychopathic behavior’.
Yes, the SA quote referred to the standard psychology whose role is to ‘adjust’ the individual to a sick society, but it seemed to me it could apply in a healthy context too. Deviant behaviour can be ‘socialised’ to make a positive contribution – psycopaths can be rehabilitated to ‘live productive lives’, even though in the current context we might prefer their criminal activities to those with the proper state sanctions (!)
A while back I met a young soldier on a train. He was on medical leave from duty in Iraq after being shot in the leg by a(nother) young boy who he’d subsequently killed. I wrote a post about it, ‘Disturbed Men‘ (which you may find relevant to the subject), in which I distinguished between the rehab necessary for institutional vs. human recovery, concluding:
This seems like something ordinary people can do.
Re: World Upside Down I’m finding it a little tough to read (nearly reached p.100 since June/July) – wading through all the historical snippets, only some of which I find as interesting as the author apparently does etc. Here’s a bit from the intro which might whet your appetite:
Sorry again for the partial relevance. Glad your trip to the hospital wasn’t too eventful
Ian
September 24, 2010 at 10:12 am
The ways communities use are not rehab, they are prevention. I have read that savvy tribes use ridicule quite a bit to cut down a person a peg, and they are carefully on the lookout for people who are a bit overeager for power and privilege… and keep them away from such positions. Rituals have been used to highlight the anti-social actions of an individual, giving them an opportunity to come to their senses, show remorse and regain community approval. Ostracism is another, more serious way. (Now that I am rereading this… these last two do fall into rehab…)
That leveller revolution is awaiting our generation to accomplish.
There are many “power-hog strategies” used to keep a society compliant. One of them is to inflict stress on a society in the form of chronic armed conflict and the injuries therefrom. It sorrows me to know what these young people are subject to. Thank you for writing about them… will check it out.
September 24, 2010 at 1:53 pm
Okay, I get the distinction you’re trying to make. Does it go something like: Civilised societies ignore root causes of disruption and, when these blow up in their faces, they act all surprised before moving to address symptoms (at a profit if possible). Other cultures deal with these causes on a day-to-day maintenance basis, so symptoms never get the chance to erupt. Rehab vs. prevention. Or is this semantics and we’re actually talking about the same processes?
Ah, yes, ‘Eating Christmas in the Kalahari‘ – how could I forget?
Good point re: the Levellers et al. I suppose Hill should’ve said ‘another revolution which never happened … at least, not yet‘. The dandelions always beat the concrete, it’s just a matter of time…
‘Power-hog strategies’ – sounds interesting. Recalls Naomi Klein’s ‘Shock Doctrine’ (video) – I guess if we’re all busy taking care of the war-traumatised young people we have less energy to devote to take down the people who started the wars and sent them in the first place. For now…
best,
Ian
September 24, 2010 at 2:42 pm
Ian, it’s a bit worse than that. Those who run civilized societies favor disruption and use it for their ends.
Yup! I think it’s really one process. Ongoing vigilance.
Yes, those Kalahari Bushmen got it down pat!
Klein’s “shock doctrine” is just one of many strategies of people I call power hogs. Somebody out there ought to be working up a good list. Cooptation is another such. Whatever keeps them in power…
September 24, 2010 at 2:50 pm
Just wanted to add: using natural or contrived disasters to solidify power and to profit from goes all the way back to the days when chiefdoms were being formed. It is a very ancient strategy.
Isn’t it time we learned to see all these tricks for what they are, once and for all?
September 24, 2010 at 4:40 pm
Yeah, that makes sense too. I thought I’d try to interpret generously for a change
Would be interested to see a list of the ‘power hog’ strategies. As an adopted child of the british empire I always keep an eye out especially for the tactic of ‘divide and rule’. The Lib-Dems in England seem to provide a pertinent current example…
Could you provide an example of ‘shock doctrine’ tactics in the early chiefdoms? Sounds fascinating!
September 24, 2010 at 6:44 pm
Divide and rule is the chief strategy, you bet. The guy to read is Brian Hayden… he published Pathways to Power in 1995, and I see another volume has just come out.
As a young anthro (archeo?) man he went to central America to study a village there, focusing especially on the role of elites in natural disaster. He was shocked to find out they did all they could to profit from it rather than use their better endowment to help people out. (I have not read it yet, so I don’t know if he is describing a recent village or one he dug up.)
I am too on the fritz right now to fish for my notes, but I remember that a big power hog strategy from far back is indebtedness (via competitive feasting). Another one is crafting stories from whole cloth that feed the power. One example, that apparently has been extensively documented for more recent times, was using the new craft of writing among the “nobility” to write up nice genealogies linking them to prestigious ancestors. I am sure as an Englishman you can relate…
Early religious societies played a role in creating stories that promoted the privilege of the men in the societies… Yuck. It makes me unwell just to recount it.
Either he or others speak of the early chiefs inciting intrigue leading to armed conflict which they manipulated for their own aggrandizement.
September 28, 2010 at 8:44 am
For those wishing to look more deeply into the area of psychopathology discussed by Jensen in his article, I recommend the excellent book by M. Scott Peck: People of the Lie. Dr, Peck was the author of the very popular The Road Less Traveled 20 some years ago. He is also the psychiatrist chosen by the US Army to investigate the MyLai atrocities in Vietnam. His book however mostly deals with “ordinary patients” he encountered who manifested a syndrome with many of the symptoms of sociopathy, but in a subtle, hard to detect form, which was nevertheless devastating not only to those manifesting the disorder, but even more so to those they were in contact with. He finally reluctantly was led to characterize this condition: Evil. The case histories and gradual formation of Peck’s insights into this phenomenon makes for fascinating and informative reading.
BTW the Army ended up rejecting and covering up the panel’s findings — all too typical of our secretive rulers.
September 28, 2010 at 8:47 am
Chris Hedges writes of Nemesis, the Greek Goddess symbolizing divine retribution. She awaits the ripening of bad karma, in order to mete out its inevitable results. We live in such a time. The negative karma of America is now overwhelming, the days of reckoning are already unfolding around us, unseen by the apologists and cheer leaders eager to bolster our mindless denial.
There are those who would demonize the more awake among us for trying to awaken the rest. They re-enact the ancient ceremonies of scapegoating and shooting the messenger. Even claiming that those who point out the prime perpetrators of our problems are somehow (in their magical thinking) the cause themselves of our troubles, which would not exist if they would only be silent.
Chris Hedges is one of those true admonitory voices. Highly recommended, at the link below:
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/retribution_for_a_world_lost_in_screens_20100927/?ln
September 28, 2010 at 11:08 am
Mike K, Leavergirl,
It is a tremendous post: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/retribution_for_a_world_lost_in_screens_20100927/?ln
I see that Dwight Towers has also found it too!
Looking forward to metabolizing this and having something to add.
September 28, 2010 at 11:59 am
Antonio — Glad you liked the Hedges piece. I catch his column every week on truthdig.
Another aspect of the dysfunctional games people play, especially in a time of troubles, is “brightsiding.” I coin that from Barbara Ehrenreich’s book “Bright-sided” (how the relentless promotion of positive thinking has undermined America).
A longtime member of a group I attend has come under the spell of this crap, and is now thinking to quit the group because he has to protect himself from the “negative thinking” a couple of us occasionally indulge in — such as pointing out some of the disastrous happenings in our society, and the need to do something about the folks perpetrating them, and also the sheeple who are sound asleep to the whole affair, presenting themselves as the perfect patsy’s for these con artists to feed on.
All this positive thinking is used by the establishment, as it was in Huxley’s Brave New World, to keep the large segment of the population who are not sufficiently doped up on various forms of Soma from becoming unhappy enough to start dreaming of revolution. How useful all the forms of the blue pill are to our Masters!
November 4, 2010 at 2:56 pm
Two reactions to the article:
1. I reject the categorization of people into unchanging classes. Most of us exhibit some degree of sociopathy. Remember the comments of Solzhenitsyn about the line between good and evil which runs through the heart of every human. For example, how often do you feel remorse for driving a car? Yet the collective impact of cars may be enough to make the planet uninhabitable for humans and many other species. Are you a sociopath?
2. The good news is that empathy can be taught and learned. I would point to the works of Marshall Rosenberg and others teaching Nonviolent Communication, also known as Compassionate Communication. We needn’t merely avoid sociopaths, though we should avoid feeding their sociopathy. There is hope for a cure.
November 6, 2010 at 11:51 am
Welcome, Vernon!
If sociopathy is the (possibly innate) inability to empathize, in what way do we “all exhibit” it? I do feel remorse for driving a car, sometimes. A sociopath never does. Isn’t able to.
Compassionate communication is an excellent tool for those who already do experience empathy but wish to deepen and improve their empathic listening and speaking skills.
It seems to me that your point your view is sociopath-friendly. Why?
November 6, 2010 at 1:08 pm
I’ve never met anyone who was beyond any empathy or remorse. Perhaps such a person exists, but I think it unlikely. On the other hand, we’ve all been in situations where we failed to empathize and felt no remorse for the victims of our actions. Let us all devote ourselves to learning and teaching compassionate communication.
NVC is the only curriculum which I know has been used to help rapists to recover without relapse. I’d like to see it taught in every prison.
November 6, 2010 at 1:18 pm
You are lucky. I have.
Why don’t you look into the books listed in this article? Surely you don’t think that just because you haven’t run into them, that is enough evidence they do not exist?
Teaching compassionate communication to sociopaths will only teach them mimic us better. A bad idea. (P.S. Most rapists are not sociopaths.)
November 6, 2010 at 9:52 pm
How do you know that I haven’t found evidence of empathy or remorse in someone whom you have written off as a sociopath? I’m less interested in finding bad guys than in helping to clean up that part of each of us which does bad things. Most of the problems I see in the world are caused by lots of people rationalizing behavior that compounds.
“There ain’t no good guys. There ain’t no bad guys. There’s only you and me and we just disagree.”
November 7, 2010 at 9:13 am
“Most of the problems I see in the world are caused by lots of people rationalizing behavior that compounds.”
I agree.
But I see 2 problems with your approach. First, when/if you run into a sociopath, you will be unable to protect yourself and those you care about because you have defined them out of existence and will not recognize them.
Second, my experience in life leads me to say that we are all good and bad in fundamental measure. Some of us, more than others. Again, your point of view will lead you, it seems to me, to trust people who should not be trusted.
Uh, say, in your world Ted Bundy was not a bad guy? We merely disagreed about raping and killing young women?
November 7, 2010 at 12:15 pm
I didn’t know Ted Bundy, so can’t say how I might have reacted to him. In the last 54 years, I’ve met a whole lot of people, and can’t think of any I’d write off as sociopaths.
This is not to say I’m a willing victim. While there have been a few losses from over-trusting, in the balance I’d say my life has been much richer because of my trusting nature. Tough comparison to make, eh?
November 7, 2010 at 12:35 pm
Are you evading my question? I did not ask you how you would have reacted to Ted Bundy had you met him. I asked, in response to your quote (“There ain’t no good guys. There ain’t no bad guys. There’s only you and me and we just disagree.”):
In your world Ted Bundy was not a bad guy? We merely disagreed about raping and killing young women?
November 8, 2010 at 9:08 pm
People do bad things. Even good people are complicit in horrid things. Every time you put gas into your car, you help to justify oil wars. But you aren’t a bad person.
November 12, 2010 at 9:05 pm
I appreciate you sticking with the argument, Vernon!
Now you are saying there *are* good people after all. But no bad people… hunh…
I think we agree that it’s about behavior. Nevertheless, there are some people who do really horrible things, and to not acknowledge that seems to me highly un-compassionate to their victims. The small minority of men who savage little girls, for example, are not “good people” in my lexicon even if they are damn kind to cats or always take public transport.
November 13, 2010 at 2:37 pm
I have met people who seemed incredibly good, but suspect they may have had skeletons in their closets, too. ;>)
Sexual predators are certainly among the most challenging people society deals with and our prisons do a lousy job. They have one of the highest rates of recidivism. The Freedom Project has demonstrated the ability to teach empathy to sexual predators. There is hope, but it doesn’t help to label some people as incurable.
November 13, 2010 at 3:10 pm
You can teach people more empathy who have empathy. You cannot teach it to those subsets of sexual predators who are also sociopaths. You are deluding yourself, and doing a huge disservice to the victims. Have you taken the time to educate yourself on sociopathy?
It helps to call people on what they are, so that potential victims can recognize them and get away. Would it not have helped all those young women Ted Bundy victimized if their parents/culture taught them such people 1) exist and 2)can be recognized?
Cure? That is pure hubris. Most cancers are incurable. So is sociopathy. Until that changes, babbling about cure is just feeding the mythology that aids and abets such hideous criminals as some sociopaths are. IMO, of course. You seem to be far more concerned about “treating” sexual predators than teaching street savvy to girls. Why? Do you have solid evidence that teaching them empathy lowers their rates of recidivism? Can you provide references?
November 18, 2010 at 5:53 am
Here are a few things I have gleaned from the internet on this subject.
How to recognize a psychopath/sociopath/narcissist: If your are a pretty normal cooperative person and you run into someone that makes you feel like you are going insane, more than likely you are dealing with someone with a personality disorder.
Here is some advice on dealing with these types when they have power over you.
“Extended rules (commandments) for dealing with psychopaths
A helpful tip that simplifies communication with corporate psychopath is to imagine yourself in torture camera with an inquisitor presiding questioning you. Or deposition in a court.
Listen carefully to every question. Pause before answering, make sure you understand the question, think it over, and only then try to answer; then be direct with your answer. Pause 10 seconds before you try to answer any question.
Short answers are the best. Do not offer any more information you than asked of you. Answer only the question asked of you, and then stop talking. Do not add any commentary. One of the oldest (and most effective) techniques is, once you’ve given your answer, the lawyer looks at you as if to say: “Keep talking.” Do not fall into this trap. Just look back at him calmly and politely as if to say: “I am waiting on you to ask another question.”
Systematically use pause before an answer to weight and reassess your options. Do not jump to answer or reply to anything. Do not attempt to be smooth. This is not a conversation. You might use you watch to ensure proper pause before an answer or to keep silence and back off if you speak too much.
Be polite and formal, practice negative politeness. Always say: “Yes, sir,” or “No, ma’am,” ….
Never argue, just state the facts.
Do not, for any reason, exhibit hostile feelings or aggression towards corporate psychopath. They are vengeful and can play this masterfully against you as it’s easy for the boss to pretend that he was threatened by subordinate of in case the psychopath is a woman that you used some anti-woman statements
Do not tell jokes or say anything sarcastic… This also can be boomerang that will return to hurt you.
Keep your composure, maintain your focus and your credibility. Ignore emotional tantrums from psychopath as they are usually carefully planned provocations. If they are provocations then they are aimed squarely to get you out of balance so that you make a mistake or commit a blunder.
Ask for a break, or ask permission to bring coffee if you feel the need to expend some emotion or situation got out of control.”
On the personal everyday level I have boiled this advice down to this. Be as boring as possible. They will soon get tired of you and go off to find another victim.
November 18, 2010 at 6:28 pm
Thanks for those tips, Glenn. I would add that whenever you encounter somebody who is abusive, as soon as you are clear of the situation, note the time and date and write down exactly what happened. This documentation can be crucial for efforts to rectify the situation. It can also help you to clear your head.
The communication skills taught by Marshall Rosenberg can be enormously helpful. For examples of the application of these skills in prisons, please search for “The Freedom Project.”
January 29, 2011 at 12:58 am
[...] also: Brilliant article and useful discussion on “Sociopaths among us“ Mirror Neurons Empathy [...]
July 18, 2011 at 6:33 am
http://scaleofjustice.blogspot.com/
for additional insight and links
July 19, 2011 at 3:47 pm
Welcome, Mike. Thank you for the link. Have you read a book getting interesting reviews… The Psychopath Test? I have it on hold at the library. Part of my summer reading.
July 31, 2011 at 10:05 am
Hi Leavergirl..
Who is the author?
July 31, 2011 at 8:39 pm
Jon Ronson. I have read most of it now. It started promisingly. He goes to learn from Dr Hare how to recognize them, then travels around and tests the Hare checklist on people, often just reading it to them and asking their reaction. A dubious premise. The book just does not deliver, IMO…
August 1, 2011 at 4:11 am
http://psychopathyawareness.wordpress.com/
this proved to be a very insightful blog…
August 2, 2011 at 8:13 am
I think it’s important not to place people in ready-made categories of dubious existence, especially categories based on medical models.
Psychopathy is one of those dubious categories that sound very official and authoritative owing to its association with medical science. Yet there is no scientific evidence for the physiological existence of so-called psychopathy. Lacking empathy (and how do we know these people labelled as psychopaths lack empathy for everyone and anyone at all times?) is not in itself a medical problem, any more than lacking pigment in hair or skin is. I know a friend who lacks any kind of jealousy. Should he be locked up? Is the lack of a common emotion or behaviour a medical disease? If so, why?
This is not to say there aren’t people who are anti-social or who cause a lot of pain and grief. We have always recognized those people without giving them medical labels. And whom amongst us haven’t at one time or another lacked empathy for people we simply don’t like or don’t particularly care for. It was ordinary Germans who looked the other way when Jews were being rounded up, not special extreme outliers called ‘psychopaths’.
Human behaviour exists on a continuous spectrum, not in neat little boxes.
August 2, 2011 at 9:39 am
Did you read my post, Brad? I said in in that most sociopaths do not engage in criminal behavior. Nobody is suggesting they be locked up for lack of empathy.
I generally agree that putting people in medical boxes is per se a dubious proposition. Nevertheless, the Eskimos could tell a sociopath by their behavior, and so should we. They are a dangerous subgroup… or do you disagree? Yes, human behavior does exist on a continuum, and those at the far end… well, I consider them having not a medical pathology, but a social one.
As for Nazi Germany, it seems to me that it was a social order where sociopaths became very prominent. Or do you think that the leading Gestapo officers or those camp doctors did not qualify? The rest of the society fell in line. Just like among us, they rise into positions of power in the corporate and financial world… and the rest of us fall in line.
Tell me, what’s wrong with placing labels that assist with recognition of people at the extreme of a spectrum? There are celebrities, there are athletes, there are (political) radicals… why not sociopaths?
August 3, 2011 at 3:21 am
Any one characteristic defined to be common or indicative in Pyschopaths is only of any significance if they exibihit all or most of those defined by Hare to the relevant degree.
For those of us that have been affected by a psychopath this debate is superfluous.
When an individual human being exhibit the 20 characteristics listed below
We have the continuum of a dangerous universal sub-species.
Test for Psychopathy
For each of the 20 characteristics, give a score of 0 if it does not apply, 1 if it applies partially and 2 if it is a perfect match.
1
Glib and Superficial Charm
The tendency to be smooth, engaging, charming, slick, and verbally facile. Psychopathic charm is not in the least shy, self-conscious, or afraid to say anything. A psychopath never gets tongue-tied. They have freed themselves from the social conventions about taking turns in talking, for example.
2
Grandiose Self-Worth
A grossly inflated view of one’s abilities and self-worth, self-assured, opinionated, cocky, a braggart. Psychopaths are arrogant people who believe they are superior human beings.
3
Need for Stimulation or
Proneness to Boredom
An excessive need for novel, thrilling, and exciting stimulation; taking chances and doing things that are risky. Psychopaths often have a low self-discipline in carrying tasks through to completion because they get bored easily. They fail to work at the same job for any length of time, for example, or to finish tasks that they consider dull or routine.
4
Pathological Lying
Can be moderate or high; in moderate form, they will be shrewd, crafty, cunning, sly, and clever; in extreme form, they will be deceptive, deceitful, underhanded, unscrupulous, manipulative, and dishonest.
5
Conning and Manipulativeness
The use of deceit and deception to cheat, con, or defraud others for personal gain; distinguished from Item #4 in the degree to which exploitation and callous ruthlessness is present, as reflected in a lack of concern for the feelings and suffering of one’s victims.
6
Lack of Remorse or Guilt
A lack of feelings or concern for the losses, pain, and suffering of victims; a tendency to be unconcerned, dispassionate, coldhearted, and unempathic. This item is usually demonstrated by a disdain for one’s victims.
7
Shallow Affect
Emotional poverty or a limited range or depth of feelings; interpersonal coldness in spite of signs of open gregariousness.
8
Callousness and
Lack of Empathy
A lack of feelings toward people in general; cold, contemptuous, inconsiderate, and tactless.
9
Parasitic Lifestyle
An intentional, manipulative, selfish, and exploitative financial dependence on others as reflected in a lack of motivation, low self-discipline, and inability to begin or complete responsibilities.
10
Poor Behavioral Controls
Expressions of irritability, annoyance, impatience, threats, aggression, and verbal abuse; inadequate control of anger and temper; acting hastily.
11
Promiscuous Sexual Behavior
A variety of brief, superficial relations, numerous affairs, and an indiscriminate selection of sexual partners; the maintenance of several relationships at the same time; a history of attempts to sexually coerce others into sexual activity or taking great pride at discussing sexual exploits or conquests.
12
Early Behavior Problems
A variety of behaviors prior to age 13, including lying, theft, cheating, vandalism, bullying, sexual activity, fire-setting, glue-sniffing, alcohol use, and running away from home.
13
Lack of Realistic,
Long-Term Goals
an inability or persistent failure to develop and execute long-term plans and goals; a nomadic existence, aimless, lacking direction in life.
14
Impulsivity
The occurrence of behaviors that are unpremeditated and lack reflection or planning; inability to resist temptation, frustrations, and urges; a lack of deliberation without considering the consequences; foolhardy, rash, unpredictable, erratic, and reckless.
15
Irresponsibility
Repeated failure to fulfill or honor obligations and commitments; such as not paying bills, defaulting on loans, performing sloppy work, being absent or late to work, failing to honor contractual agreements.
16
Failure to Accept Responsibility
for Own Actions
A failure to accept responsibility for one’s actions reflected in low conscientiousness, an absence of dutifulness, antagonistic manipulation, denial of responsibility, and an effort to manipulate others through this denial.
17
Many Short-Term Marital Relationships
A lack of commitment to a long-term relationship reflected in inconsistent, undependable, and unreliable commitments in life, including marital.
18
Juvenile Delinquency
Behavior problems between the ages of 13-18; mostly behaviors that are crimes or clearly involve aspects of antagonism, exploitation, aggression, manipulation, or a callous, ruthless tough-mindedness.
19
Revocation of Condition Release
A revocation of probation or other conditional release due to technical violations, such as carelessness, low deliberation, or failing to appear.
20
Criminal Versatility
A diversity of types of criminal offenses, regardless if the person has been arrested or convicted for them; taking great pride at getting away with crimes.
TOTAL
August 3, 2011 at 9:45 am
Mike, the list was developed out of Hare’s experience with incarcerated criminals. But most Ps are not criminals. There ought to be something more suited for people in ordinary circumstances.
August 4, 2011 at 2:18 am
Only one of the 20 characteristics has a bearing on Incarceration…. Hare himself noted this and the test reflects this.
August 4, 2011 at 9:37 am
As I read it, the last three points (and out of 20, that is a lot) have bearing only in situations where the P is criminally oriented. Most are not. I think my use of the term “incarceration” was misleading. I really meant criminal behavior.
August 14, 2011 at 9:08 pm
One more thing about The Psychopath Test. The author dug up a lot of information about the efforts of certain pioneering psychologists who sought to change psychopaths incarcerated in a mental health institution through extended therapy sessions that at the time seemed to produce changes in these men and stirred up a lot of hope. But on follow up?
Previous stats showed 60% reoffense rate after release. The psychpaths who went through the program? The reoffense rate was 80%. They themselves said, on later interviews, that they learned to be craftier, better able to hide their true nature, via those therapy sessions.