Never heard of the fifth one but I'm not surprised. I liked the point about ASPD being a diagnostic label and the DSM pretty much being an insurance repayment manual. I'm diagnosed with ASPD and I'm definitely not a psychopath, the fact that the two terms are conflated annoys the shit out of me. Sociopath is more likely, though I see myself as someone who is relatively neurotypical with character flaws such as anger and addiction which by the way, is correlated with both psychopathy and ASPD. Not sure why, it's surely not for emotional dependence reasons but both psychopathy and ASPD have poor impulse control so that is probably what leads to the chemical dependency aspect.
You're actually the first person I've seen tell the truth about Ted Bundy for example, not being a psychopath. Dahmer it's a little more obvious but Bundy clearly wasn't either despited being touted as the "prototypical psychopath" it just goes to show that most people glaze over Psychology as a whole and throw words around without understanding what they mean. As for Robert Hare and the PCL-R, I can't fault the guy for conducting research in prison because it's where you have a good chance of finding a concentration of psychopaths - but it's obviously going to yield results that show off the dumber ones.
Overall good read and useful information, these myths are indubitably the reason most psychopaths don't reveal themselves.
Interestingly, while some psychopaths may use drugs, they lack the ability to become addicted to them. The brain wiring prevents this. This allows psychopaths to stop using drugs immediately with no negative repercussions. You can find more information about that here if you like:
I think Hare has done a lot of damage to the understanding of psychopathy, and a good number of the people included in studies regarding psychopathy in prison have ASPD, brain injuries, sociopathy, drug and alcohol histories. Due tot he PCL-R being so overreaching in it's traits, and all the studies are based on them, he has more or less constructed the quagmire, even if unwittingly.
No one lacks the ability to become addicted or dependent on drugs but it does sound like they don't experience the same degree of withdrawal or cravings which makes sense in my experience. Some drugs override the brain more than sex or food/water would and that's more about specific drugs than anyone's brain chemistry. The article also pointed out that psychopaths are more likely to be diagnosed with dependence or SUD but it sounds like due to the psychopaths lifestyle choice that it wouldn't make a big difference whether they used or not. I've never struggled with hiding drug use personally and I don't see why anyone with ASPD or psychopathy would.
After reading that I can relate to some of the struggles and advantages that pertain to "psychopaths" especially relapsing after a period of sober time, though it's not really something I'm curious about anymore in any professionals opinion whether I'm a psychopath or sociopath. After reading about some of the horror stories in psychiatric wards upon diagnosis, I'd rather steer clear of that being in my file. I don't think psychopaths would attend substance use treatment, it's a bunch of moralistic idiots and losers who think their sobriety is something to be proud about.
Without craving or withdrawal, I think it's up to the individual psychopath whether or not they stay sober and treatment of any kind is going to have to involve several professionals to drop their preconceived notions.
You are incorrect. Psychopaths lack the ability to become addicted. This is due to low frontal lobe activity, and is being studied for possible insight on how to help those that can be addicted.
Most people that are assumed to be psychopathic by previous studies are not. In previous studies they were not confirming with brain scans, but instead using PCL-R scores only for study inclusion, which does not a psychopath make. Including addicts of any sort in a study regarding psychopathy nullifies it's value from the start, as drug use can have dramatic effects on the function of the brain.
A person being antisocial, which is what the PCL-R identifies over psychopathy is not unusual. Most people (50-80%) in prison qualify for a diagnosis of ASPD, where as only 15% of those would be considered psychopathic. Addicts are often antisocial because they are addicts. These people, who are not psychopathic, are included in studies, and obfuscates actual insight into psychopathy. You have to identify psychopathy through a far more extensive process, which they do not bother undertaking.
This study uses brain scans, and demonstrated that the psychopathic structure of the brain removes the ability to be addicted, physical dependency, and withdrawal symptoms. I have had many discussions with neuroscientists about this, and it is something that is unique to psychopathy, and something that is of great interest for further study.
This is also something that I can attest to in my own life. There is no ability to be addicted to anything. There is no high either. Nothing about drugs, or what they are supposed to do for people have dramatic diminishing returns in my brain, much to my doctor's chagrin, and there is no physical high of any sort. The other psychopath that I know is precisely the same as I am.
I'd seen the cancer and disease thing before. It makes psychopaths seem like they're some sort of shadow knight from a fantasy roleplaying game with dark powers to destroy
It’s easy to imagine that Machiavellians are some sort of geniuses, so the conflation by association.
One can be high Mach, yet neurotypical average.
There are professions that require this, within a narrow context, such as hypnotherapists.
Machiavellian is very different from psychopathy, but I can see what you mean.
Never heard of the fifth one but I'm not surprised. I liked the point about ASPD being a diagnostic label and the DSM pretty much being an insurance repayment manual. I'm diagnosed with ASPD and I'm definitely not a psychopath, the fact that the two terms are conflated annoys the shit out of me. Sociopath is more likely, though I see myself as someone who is relatively neurotypical with character flaws such as anger and addiction which by the way, is correlated with both psychopathy and ASPD. Not sure why, it's surely not for emotional dependence reasons but both psychopathy and ASPD have poor impulse control so that is probably what leads to the chemical dependency aspect.
You're actually the first person I've seen tell the truth about Ted Bundy for example, not being a psychopath. Dahmer it's a little more obvious but Bundy clearly wasn't either despited being touted as the "prototypical psychopath" it just goes to show that most people glaze over Psychology as a whole and throw words around without understanding what they mean. As for Robert Hare and the PCL-R, I can't fault the guy for conducting research in prison because it's where you have a good chance of finding a concentration of psychopaths - but it's obviously going to yield results that show off the dumber ones.
Overall good read and useful information, these myths are indubitably the reason most psychopaths don't reveal themselves.
Interestingly, while some psychopaths may use drugs, they lack the ability to become addicted to them. The brain wiring prevents this. This allows psychopaths to stop using drugs immediately with no negative repercussions. You can find more information about that here if you like:
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00087/full
I think Hare has done a lot of damage to the understanding of psychopathy, and a good number of the people included in studies regarding psychopathy in prison have ASPD, brain injuries, sociopathy, drug and alcohol histories. Due tot he PCL-R being so overreaching in it's traits, and all the studies are based on them, he has more or less constructed the quagmire, even if unwittingly.
No one lacks the ability to become addicted or dependent on drugs but it does sound like they don't experience the same degree of withdrawal or cravings which makes sense in my experience. Some drugs override the brain more than sex or food/water would and that's more about specific drugs than anyone's brain chemistry. The article also pointed out that psychopaths are more likely to be diagnosed with dependence or SUD but it sounds like due to the psychopaths lifestyle choice that it wouldn't make a big difference whether they used or not. I've never struggled with hiding drug use personally and I don't see why anyone with ASPD or psychopathy would.
After reading that I can relate to some of the struggles and advantages that pertain to "psychopaths" especially relapsing after a period of sober time, though it's not really something I'm curious about anymore in any professionals opinion whether I'm a psychopath or sociopath. After reading about some of the horror stories in psychiatric wards upon diagnosis, I'd rather steer clear of that being in my file. I don't think psychopaths would attend substance use treatment, it's a bunch of moralistic idiots and losers who think their sobriety is something to be proud about.
Without craving or withdrawal, I think it's up to the individual psychopath whether or not they stay sober and treatment of any kind is going to have to involve several professionals to drop their preconceived notions.
You are incorrect. Psychopaths lack the ability to become addicted. This is due to low frontal lobe activity, and is being studied for possible insight on how to help those that can be addicted.
Most people that are assumed to be psychopathic by previous studies are not. In previous studies they were not confirming with brain scans, but instead using PCL-R scores only for study inclusion, which does not a psychopath make. Including addicts of any sort in a study regarding psychopathy nullifies it's value from the start, as drug use can have dramatic effects on the function of the brain.
A person being antisocial, which is what the PCL-R identifies over psychopathy is not unusual. Most people (50-80%) in prison qualify for a diagnosis of ASPD, where as only 15% of those would be considered psychopathic. Addicts are often antisocial because they are addicts. These people, who are not psychopathic, are included in studies, and obfuscates actual insight into psychopathy. You have to identify psychopathy through a far more extensive process, which they do not bother undertaking.
This study uses brain scans, and demonstrated that the psychopathic structure of the brain removes the ability to be addicted, physical dependency, and withdrawal symptoms. I have had many discussions with neuroscientists about this, and it is something that is unique to psychopathy, and something that is of great interest for further study.
This is also something that I can attest to in my own life. There is no ability to be addicted to anything. There is no high either. Nothing about drugs, or what they are supposed to do for people have dramatic diminishing returns in my brain, much to my doctor's chagrin, and there is no physical high of any sort. The other psychopath that I know is precisely the same as I am.
I'd seen the cancer and disease thing before. It makes psychopaths seem like they're some sort of shadow knight from a fantasy roleplaying game with dark powers to destroy
It's just bizarre, isn't it?
I agree. So many people can't even consider not giving their emotions the power that they do, so they never even try.
Yes I agree