Left Handed People Are Crazy

So psychopathy is genetic...

You read that right, and no, it isn’t me making the claim. This is an actual article that we are going to go through.

I got a message the other day with the link to an article. Usually, when I am writing about articles it is to debunk them, and there is an endless supply of those. However, this one… this one was pretty strange. So I thought we would go through it. I will speak to what I think that they got right, and of course what they got wrong. The article link is at the bottom of this post.

Wild Paper Claims Psychopathy May Not Be a Mental Disorder, But Something Else

For more than half a century, the kinds of antisocial personality traits we think of as psychopathic – such as a lack of remorse, aggression, and disregard for the wellbeing of others – have been associated with mental illness.

The line between broken and useful traits can be hazy in biology, leaving open the possibility that what is now considered a malfunction might once have been promoted by natural selection.

I have always wondered why these traits are considered so negative. There has to be a source for that being the case. Many laws and morals are founded on religious teachings, but even in those, there is a degree of most of those traits either in the followers themselves, or in their deity without there being the assumption that they are negative things.

When looking at something like aggression and lack of remorse, both of these things were necessary for humans as a group to survive. If you felt bad about killing the people that came to kill you and steal your stuff, you wouldn’t make it very far on the evolutionary ladder. Even a disregard for the well-being of others is helpful in those circumstances.

Disregard for which people’s wellbeing exactly? How large of a group are you meant to extend that to? People’s group sizes vary. For some people, it is their community. For some people, it is their friend group and family. For some people, it is just their family. For some people, it is only themselves. Most people aren’t going to be very concerned with the well-being of those that do not fall into the group that they are invested in. It’s standard human behavior. Psychopaths aren’t any different, except our group tends to be ourselves first, and then others that we deem worthy. Why this is considered a mental illness when it isn’t any different than other humans, has always baffled me.

We might find it tricky to think of evolution benefiting antisocial people, but nature has no problem leaving room for the occasional freeloader within otherwise cooperative species like our own. Those alternative traits that make psychopaths so despised could feasibly give them an edge in a world where competition for resources is intense.

Here we run into a problem. This paragraph is conflating antisocial with psychopathy. Now, I understand that this is the framework that the author thinks that he has to deal with, being that he is speaking about Robert Haree’s PCL-R. I know this because there is no other list that uses “parasitic lifestyle”, which is more or less the definition of “freeloader”. You all know my complaints when it comes to the PCL-R. If not, there is a three-part series about it on this very site.

All right, so we see from the beginning that the idea of “psychopathy”, and the traits that this article is speaking of, are those from the PCL-R. This is an inaccurate list of traits, and the majority of the PCL-R identifies antisocial people, or sociopathy. Only the first set of traits relate to primary psychopathy. That is going to cause some confusion when parsing through this author’s perspective, but I will try my best to address psychopathy both as he is envisioning it, and how it actually is. Let’s begin with the traits he is dealing with:

The PCL-R traits are:

Factor 1.

1 Glibness/superficial charm

2 Grandiose sense of self-worth

3 Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom

4 Pathological lying

5 Cunning/manipulative

6 Lack of remorse or guilt

7 Shallow affect [i.e. superficial experience and expression of emotions]

8 Callous/lack of empathy

Factor 2.

9 Parasitic lifestyle

10 Poor behavioural controls

11 Promiscuous sexual behaviour

12 Early behaviour problems

13 Lack of realistic long-term goals

14 Impulsivity

15 Irresponsibility

16 Failure to accept responsibility for own actions

17 Many short term marital relationships

18 Juvenile delinquency

19 Revocation of conditional release

20 Criminal versatility

These are the traits he is associating with psychopathy. However, a far more accurate list, one that applies to psychopaths in general, not to those that are criminals, which is where the PCL-R is used to assess, comes from Kevin Dutton. He is a psychopathy researcher who has been dealing with it outside of prisons, as well as in, to get a better understanding of noncriminal psychopaths who make up the majority of psychopaths in existence. Only about ten percent are criminals, the rest of us are living normal lives. His trait list is as follows:

Ruthlessness

Fearlessness

Impulsivity

Self Confidence

Focus

Coolness under pressure

Mental toughness

Charm

Charisma

Empathy-cognitive only

Conscience-cognitive only

You’ll note that a major difference between the two is one largely deals with how a person acts in the world, the other has to do with how a person experiences the world. When he states:

“Those alternative traits that make psychopaths so despised could feasibly give them an edge in a world where competition for resources is intense.”

If you are using the first set of traits you can certainly see why psychopaths would be despised. Granted, it is inaccurate, but it doesn’t exactly paint a good picture.

Here is an issue with the argument that PCL-R traits and psychopathy being an evolutionary advantage runs into problems. Those traits might serve a person if they live in a large society like our modern cities. They wouldn’t however, fly in a tribal society. Why do I make this argument? Because in a tribal society there is a deep familiarity with all the people there. If you bring harm to the tribe or are not beneficial to the tribe, you would be ousted immediately. PCL-R traits would make a person a liability, not an advantage to the tribe, and therefore that person would be removed.

When you look at the Dutton list, on the other hand, you can see how most of these traits have an evolutionary advantage, instead of huge problems. The PCL-R is based on a very modern social living situation, not based on how humans cohabitated in the past. If we are speaking about psychopathy having value evolutionarily, then it makes no sense to be trying to define it based on very modern circumstances. In fact, it defeats its own argument. Anyway, let’s get back to his argument.

A team of Canadian researchers explored this possibility in a study published last year in the journal Evolutionary Psychology, arguing psychopathy lacks certain hallmarks of a disorder, so should be considered more like a function operating as intended.

Their conclusion is based on an analysis of existing research containing validated measures of psychopathy together with details on the person's handedness; however, this correlation echoes outdated science from the early days of criminal psychology.

Arguing from their own point of view, that is using the PCL-R for the definition of psychopathy, they are incorrect here. Antisocial behavior is definitely a disorder. It causes society problems and it causes the individual problems, whether or not they accept that their behavior is disordered, as the definition of disorder that applies to this line of thinking is:

“disrupt the systematic functioning or neat arrangement of.”

That means that antisocial traits are certainly a disorder, and it is one of the person’s mental thinking.

However, if you are using Dutton’s list, they are correct, psychopathy does not have the hallmarks of a disorder. Now we are going to get into right and left-handedness for much longer than I think was necessary to make his point, but what can I do? I didn’t write the article.

Historically, links between being left-handed and a 'sinister' personality were all but given. Early models of mental illness and sociability regarded handedness as a convenient sign of an individual's degeneracy.

Science no longer regards left-handed folk as ill-fated criminals, though the question of how handedness might pair with a litany of other physiological and psychological traits remains a common one in research.

Central to it all is the age-old question of nature versus nurture. Genetics does appear to play a role in handedness, if a rather complicated one. Cultural influences may also determine how much a person favors one hand over the other, allowing them to fit into communities that favor the right-handed.

There are also a vast mix of environmental nudges, such as stress or nutrition or exposure to pollution while in the womb, that can push a person's genetic heritage for handedness into one direction or the other.

The history lesson is great, it’s somewhat interesting, but it seems it could have been summed up by saying, “We used to think that left-handedness had something to do with being a criminal. Then we found out that was wrong, and we were totally off base, sorry left-handed people. We kind of shafted you there. Anyway, let’s go back to talking about psychopathy.”

But no, that is not what happens here, instead, the study seems to try to lend some kind of credibility to the left-handed people are the devil narrative. Let’s watch them crash and burn in this next part, shall we?

Since the researchers in this study found no clear evidence that psychopathic subjects were less likely to be right-handed, it might be assumed that their development hasn't necessarily been affected by their environment to any significant extent.

*head on desk*

Why would there be anything remotely correlated with psychopaths having left-handedness? Do you still think left-handed people are criminals? Are you trying to link psychopathy not only with criminality but with right and left-handedness? It has nothing to do with psychopathy. Why would you think that handedness has anything to do with mental illness, let alone psychopathy which is not a mental illness at all? About eight percent of the people in the world are left-handed. I know several of them, and none of them are criminals or do they have any mental illnesses. Even if they did, I do not see why that would have anything to do with what hand they use.

I am trying to see the logical link between the handedness part of this and psychopathy being an evolutionary complement to neurotypicals. I have read this article six times, and I still fail to see the connection. Maybe it was in the study? I don’t know, I haven’t read it yet. However, if there is, I do not see how he made a cogent argument for this one. If someone else sees it, point it out to me. I would like to know what he was trying to say here.

All right, I looked at the study. In the first part of the study it states:

Although the etiology of mental disorders is not fully understood, one likely contributor is perturbations affecting neurodevelopment. Nonright-handedness is a sign of such perturbations, and therefore can be used to test these competing models. If psychopathy is a mental disorder, psychopaths should show elevated rates of nonright-handedness. However, an adaptive strategy perspective expects psychopaths to be neurologically healthy and therefore predicts typical rates of nonright-handedness. We meta-analyzed 16 studies that investigated the association between psychopathy and handedness in various populations. There was no difference in the rates of nonright-handedness between community participants high and low in psychopathy. Furthermore, there was no difference between psychopathic and nonpsychopathic offenders in rates of nonright-handedness, though there was a tendency for offenders scoring higher on the Interpersonal/Affective dimension of psychopathy to have lower rates of nonright-handedness, and for offenders scoring higher on the Behavioral dimension of psychopathy to have higher rates of nonright-handedness. Lastly, there was no difference in rates of nonright-handedness between psychopathic and nonpsychopathic mental health patients. Thus, our results fail to support the mental disorder model and partly support the adaptive strategy model. We discuss limitations of the meta-analysis and implications for theories of the origins of psychopathy.

The argument here then is… we don’t know how mental illness develops, but we think it has to anxiety and mental uneasiness, and that also lends to people having left-handedness. I… I don’t think that’s true though. Shall we go see for ourselves?

When I look up what causes left-handedness I find this:

Handedness appears to be related to differences between the right and left halves (hemispheres) of the brain. The right hemisphere controls movement on the left side of the body, while the left hemisphere controls movement on the right side of the body.

and:

Left-handedness occurs in about 8% of the human population. It runs in families and an adoption study suggests a genetic rather than an environmental origin; however, monozygotic twins show substantial discordance.

Sooo… that sort of undermines the whole idea that it is caused by mental uneasiness and anxiety… I mean, doesn’t it? This whole article seems to be based on an idea that isn’t supported by science. However, it is what we have to deal with, so let’s move on.

This leaves open the possibility that whatever genes are at work are operating as evolution elected, providing (as the researchers describe it) an 'alternative life history strategy' for those who inherited them.

There are plenty of reasons to hold judgement one way or another on the entire debate. Specific to this study, just 16 studies ultimately informed the conclusion, combining data on just under 2,000 individuals, making it statistically weak.

Sample sizes aside, it's hard to limit variables in studies like these, making it impossible to exclude the possibility of confounding conditions muddying the waters.

Beyond all of this, there is the more philosophical question over what makes differences in our form and function a disease in the first place. Whole books are written (one by the author of this very article) over the changing definitions of health and illness.

How do those four paragraphs add anything to this article? It seems like he had a word requirement, so he just said, yeah, it seems genetic, but the information is not enough to draw any kind of conclusions, don’t forget that we can’t really offer any sort of steady cohort, and then wooooooorrrrrrddddddssssss!

The argument is literally, since psychopaths do not have a greater propensity for being left-handed than other people, psychopathy therefore must be genetic. Well, I agree with the conclusion, psychopathy is absolutely genetic, I disagree with the way they arrived at this conclusion.

You would first have to demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt that handedness has anything to do with an uneasy mind, and anxiety, and not in and of itself genetic, as it seems the studies seem to be demonstrating. Only after doing so would you be able to even broach this argument, but as it is not agreed upon about the formation of left-handedness, and they have certainly debunked the handedness and criminal/evil narrative, then you really don’t have anything to stand on when it comes to the genetics of psychopathy.

Let me remind you, people. They are getting paid to do this research. Paid and they get a boost to their reputation. It’s sort of mind-numbing.

Psychopathy can at once be unwanted under one set of circumstances and prized in another, without invoking models of disease. It can be both an alternative strategy to survival, helping in some social contexts before becoming a disorder in another.

Psychopathy is not something that other people get to determine whether or not it’s wanted or unwanted. Psychopaths are genetically coded, exist in this world, and aren’t going anywhere. It is up to each individual psychopath to be the best member of society that they can be, and if they don’t they reap the consequences for their choices and actions. Psychopathy has always been complementary to neurotypicality. We wouldn’t exist if that wasn’t the case.

Like so many things in biology, disease is a convenient box we try to wrestle a complicated system into.

Psychopathy's more clinical twin, antisocial personality disorder (APD), was officially given a place in the second edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-II) in 1968. Even after a number of revisions, APD remains in the DSM, adjusted over time with criteria that can be observed and checked more objectively.

Whether we'll continue to regard psychopathy as a disorder in the future will depend on a variety of considerations, not least the results of studies like this one.

Antisocial personality disorder is not a clinical twin of psychopathy. To write that sentence demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of psychopathy altogether. We of course then have to go to the insurance repayment manual for validation of his position, but it weakens it instead. ASPD describes behavior, not cause. It is also likely (I haven’t read through the entire thing to be certain, but certainly hope this is true) the worst diagnostic label in the entire DSM. I’m probably wrong about that, there is probably something worse, but it’s terrible so I think it is in at least the top ten terrible labels.

Whether psychopathy is considered a disorder in the future will depend entirely on the intelligence of those that decide to study it. If they are going to use Hare, and the PCL-R as the basis for their research, it will remain as it is now. If there are people who have brain cells holding hands who go into research of psychopathy, then perhaps progression can be made.

No matter how we regard disorders like APD, psychopathy can play a role in behaviors that disrupt and destroy the wellbeing of many.

Knowing more about how it works, and how to help those with it, is an answer we could all benefit from. 

I can tell you how to be helpful. It’s a big secret so lean in close…

Stop making psychopathy and by extension psychopaths out to be criminals, don’t act as though you have some say in our existence, and actually be parents to children and teach them personal responsibility, boundaries, impulse control, and most important, cognitive empathy. Meet children where they are. Antisocial psychopaths are usually created by their environment. They do not have good lessons and clear rules and responsibilities went they are children, and they, therefore, cause chaos as adults.

Most antisocial people are neurotypical, and their antisocial traits tend to come from their upbringing as well. If you want to head off antisocial traits, start being better parents. Screens should not be raising your kids, you have to tell them no and mean it, they have to have consequences for their actions that mean something to them, and you have to be involved with them. That is something that we all benefit from.

This sentence:

“No matter how we regard disorders like APD, psychopathy can play a role in behaviors that disrupt and destroy the wellbeing of many.”

is almost painful. I don’t even know what he is trying to say here. “No matter how we regard disorders like APD”… all right, fair, ASPD is a disorder. Psychopathy is not ASPD and it isn’t related to ASPD either, so the rest of his sentence makes no sense. Psychopathy is not what disrupts or destroys anyone’s well-being. Actions do that, not psychopathy.

As I have said in the past, some psychopaths are d*cks, and as much as I may point to upbringing for the cause of antisocial behavior, everyone makes their choices, and they can live or die by the consequences that they bring to their doors. The people that have ASPD do a lot of damage, and at some point, we have to stop giving them excuses like they can’t help themselves, their rearing was dreadful. The ASPD isn’t their fault.

It’s ASPD by the way, not APD. How am I certain about that? Google APD, see what comes up. Anything there related to antisocial personality disorder? Nope, not one on the first page. Now do ASPD. What came up?

“Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) is a mental health condition. People with ASPD may not understand how to behave toward others. Their behavior is often disrespectful, manipulative or reckless. Management of ASPD can include medication or psychotherapy

Results for APD - Agency for Persons with Disabilities, for Auditory Processing Disorder, Army Publishing Directorate, Air Products, and a couple of police departments. If when you go to search for a term, and it doesn’t come up at all, you have used the wrong term. Maybe there are some people that want to try and switch it to APD, but sorry folks, that ship has sailed. It’s ASPD. I think it’s a garbage diagnosis, you all know that, but it is what it is, and it is identified by that four-letter acronym.

Well, that was a weird article. We have learned that because they still think people with left-handedness are defective and it is caused by an uneasy mind and anxiety which leads to left-handed people having mental illnesses, and psychopaths do not have a propensity for left-handedness, it is therefore somehow genetic… for reasons.

Seems completely logical to me. Here's a question for you. Do you think that these people turn in their grant applications with a straight face but with the real study parameters, or do you think that they just turn in something completely generic like, psychopathy might be genetic, let’s look into it, and then create some ridiculous study where they look for inane information in a metaanalysis and spend the rest of the money on booze and pocket protectors?

I’m thinking pocket protectors lined in gold personally.

I will give the author one thing, this study was definitely “wild”, if wild means completely bizarre idea that they try to prove with myths that were debunked decades ago.

Wild Paper Claims Psychopathy May Not Be a Mental Disorder, But Something Else

Is Psychopathy a Mental Disorder or an Adaptation? Evidence From a Meta-Analysis of the Association Between Psychopathy and Handedness

APD Search

ASPD Search