Psychopathy should not be considered in any sort of sentencing either way. How is a neurotypical who feels his victim deserved death better or worse than a psychopath was saw a personal advantage from a killing?
There’s no difference in my mind between the neurotypical who kills and the psychopath who kills. End result is the same, they both killed.
I think the psychopathy diagnosis might influence sentencing because people imagine that it is the psychopathy that caused the psychopath to kill. Psychopathy can’t be ‘cured’ ( it’s seen as a disorder in the majority perspective) so the perceived risk of re offence would be seen to be higher.
The neurotypical would be perceived as having the potential for rehabilitation so I think it’s this part that makes the difference in the mind of many.
The problem I think comes right at the start of that thinking and it’s the idea that ‘psychopathy made him do it.’ Psychopathy being seen as the sole driver or, ‘if he hadn’t been a psychopath he wouldn’t have killed.’ That’s where the stigma around psychopathy comes into play I think. It’s that perception that ‘all psychopaths are evil’ that still sits front and centre in the minds of many people. It’s the same idea over and over, that being ‘all killers are psychopaths.’
To clarify, this is not my view, but I do think it is the view of many.
I always found that to be shortsighted. A psychopath will not kill or offend due to high emotional impulse, but many crimes are committed in such a state.
Even if a person wanted to provide information, relative to murders, killings, state of mind and such, there are no statue of limitations: All info is from those caught and in prison. The system prevents non-prisoners from coming forward.
Puritanical roots, not very enlightened by New Testament:
Paul was a murderer, of church people: Yet the Good Christians helped him escape by lowering him, in a basket, out of the city. Colorful imagery!
Moses, a very central figure, killed an Eygptian slave owner and covered up his body, though not very successfully. He fled but returned some years later. There was no "warrant" though he was certainly known "killer".
King David, a man "after God's own heart", murdered Uriah (along with his crew) because David got Bathseba pregnant, while she was married to Uriah.
Most Evangelicals feel they will join murderers Paul, Moses, and David, in eternal bliss. They will all speak English and make even Uriah wear Red Hats.
Yet in the name of religion and violence and vengeance, they (USA) reverse and insist those who kill or murder take it to the grave.
Speaking of colorful imagery: "...when I was a toxic little beastie and got into all kinds of trouble." -smiles-
At some point, for some reason, you made some changes. I did the same. And continue to do so now.
Thanks again for your work and patience to keep at the wheel.
Doesn't matter all that much why (well, to emotionally minded does, but I focus here on more practical component (which can lie also underneath obvious emotional reaction to cold-blooded acts)), more like, how likely they are to do it again and how likely they are to execute it in a way that no one sees coming and they do not get caught for. As in... Those who do decide to start using killing as their method to get things (or mysteriously somehow find something in the killing (much rarer occurance, but I think it wasn't ruled out as totally impossible in these circles)) would be highly undeterrable. A position which runs into problem with single-time killings when some neurotypical's reserves broke under pressure and those with chronically criminal lifestyle because the second case would be just as highly undeterrable. But then again, that is what they put in the same box as your neurological variant. It also runs into fact that emotionally reactive people might develop transgressive pattern based on emotionality, just not all, could be a minority. Yeah, it is a mire. Just tried to put my finger on where it could be coming from.
Most neurotypicals that kill for emotional reasons are no less likely to repeat that pattern of behavior when they are confronted with a situation that challenges their emotions again.
You have done it again! Reconfirmed what I learned along the way during my life with a psychopath. What you have written here, from my observation and years trying to figure out my partner's way of thinking, you have stated to a "T". He was not quite as clear spoken as you are about psychopathy, nor was he able to explain as you do, but none-the-less, you explain to me over and over what psychopathy is, and I am so thankful for the knowledge you have shared.
Explaining psychopathy in a way that is relatable is a difficult task, so I can understand why there isn't a lot of information available about it. I suppose having an interest in writing, having high cognitive empathy, and the availability of other people to give me their perspectives have sort of come together in an interesting way.
Do you have any posts about how you were when you were younger? You come across as too perfect and this causes people to idealize psychopathy. Maybe you're not revealing too much about yourself for your own protection but it would be interesting to hear about your toxic little beastie times.
Not a whole lot, no, because as I have mentioned in the past, I don't have an interest in sharing identifying information. I don't know how I come across as perfect as I readily speak about faults, screwups, and other negative aspects of who I am.
Indeed you do. Maybe it's how we perceive your unflappable nature, confidence... or because you lack shame and guilt when you talk about your screw ups and without that component we don't assign any magnitude.
I'd like to hear about that part of your life too. To have a better understanding of what a so-called low functioning psychopath is. A comparison within a single person might give a better illustration.
I'd be also interested about the transition phase. What's the motivation behind, what did you have to learn and how did you do it? For example, you mentioned an impulse control as one, but then also which perspective did you change (if any), how and why?
The thing I got from this post, isn't that advocacy is wrong, but rather that with society's current understanding of psychopathy, there are going to be consequences in doing so. Who knows how societal attitudes will be in the future.
I enjoyed this post. As usual, you went down every corridor that I might want to peak into. I do wonder about something you would be uniquely perfect for and whether it is something you’d be interested in. It’s got to do with AI. I don’t have enough room here to go into all the specifics, but I can easily image your as a special consultant to one of the major AI companies. Have you thought about psychopathy in a world full of AI? What if AI could be programmed to emulate the most useful parts of being a psychopath? It’s fascinating to think about, and could provide you with a very interesting opportunity.
I actually have a friend that does AI development and used me as a reference point for AI training. I suppose to pursue something like that I would hit him up again and see what the landscape looks like.
Interesting! I hope your friend paid you well! If it’s something you’d be interested in doing at a high level, email me (you have my email) and let’s talk about it. I may have some great connections for this. Also, interestingly enough, the reason your post clicked with me right now is because I’m rereading an excellent book titled FranKissStein which deals with a lot of important aspects of AI and I was trying to find a quote I remembered from the book about being trans. I have a trans friend who I wanted to give the quote to. The quote is in this section: “I am part of a small group of transgender medical professionals. Some of us are transhuman enthusiasts too. That isn’t surprising; we feel or have felt that we’re in the wrong body. We can understand the feeling that any-body is the wrong body.” I was struck by this idea. Reading your post, while reading this book, made something click for me. It made me think about how AI is going to resemble (or not) neurotypical behavior and how beneficial it would be for AI to have some psychopathic behavior or processing or something given the potential benefits of that. Read FranKissStein by Jeanette Winterson for more to think about on this topic (as well as a really great work of literature spanning from Frankenstein to AI today, wrapped in a unique love story of sorts. Now I’m going to think more about this angle.
Do you still have my email address? If you want to explore this, email me. Obviously this isn’t something that people are actively looking for (that I know of) so I would have to create pitch, etc. I think I could do it, but we need to chat.
I agree on your point that it would be beneficial to consider psychopathy in AI modelling/research. In this aspect I think of a psychopathy as an anomaly, that can tech us a great deal about a neurotypical world.
I'm trying to think of a way to model an emotional feedback system, Athena have been previously writing about[1]. Why are we so dependent on it (on inner workings level) and why it makes us feel the way she described in the absence of it? Model an open vs. closed feedback system and there's your answer.
Easier said than done but ping me if I sparked your interest or if you can point me in the right direction.
We NT's/most humans would be "dependent on an emotional feedback system" because it was useful evolution-wise. Survival of the most relevant? So the question would be how an emotional feedback system contributed to survival and therefore opportunities to reproduce.
This answer seems clear. Since memories are "attached" to emotions in NTs, then so is learning. And learning to avoid dangerous situations would be linked to memories of events that induce fear.
For psychopaths, a similar question would be how the lack of an emotional feedback system would contribute to survival (and thus opportunities for reproduction). I can see an answer here as related to lack of fear enabling higher level of brave responses contributing to winning fights. (Or losing them to bigger/stronger predators.)
Also perhaps lack of fear during the childhood learning period might lead to more exposure to danger and therefore fewer survivors. I'm reminded here of animal documentaries that track various kinds of families where the braver youngsters don't always manage to avoid the dangerous snakes and other lethal opportunities. So perhaps that would account for the statistics re percentage of psychopaths in the human population.
I wonder what would happen if you take all Athena's answers on Quora and used it to train an AI model to predict what her answers would be for new questions.
My guess is that it would be lacking dept because training AI would require a much bigger database
Yes, there would need to be a commitment to neurodiversity, but Athena and her database would be the best possible first steps to add to the AI training mix.
Here’s some interesting topic discussions to think about; why a psychopath wouldn’t want to romantically be with another psychopath, and when an empath is more reliable, and keeps you more safe than a high functioning psychopath can.🤍
That's an interesting idea. However, I think it comes down too personal preference and what the individual is looking for in a relationship. The different types of people provide very different things and expect very different things.
Having served more than one prison sentence, I actually kind of found it a little bit amusing when the other people serving their time for their collective crime would tell each other that they were bona fide psychopaths.
Now, I'm not saying that there were no actual psychopaths out of all the people that have been in prison with because I'm sure that they're probably were but I would have no way of knowing as I am not a clinical diagnostician and I only know a little bit about psychopathy based on what I've read so I would have no way of judging the validity of their claims.
However, I have gathered based on what I've read that true psychopaths aren't wired for things like empathy, sympathy, and they don't process oxytocin the same way that we neurotypically do providing a basis for love as we NTS know it.
All of that said, the thing that I found amusing, is when one of the other inmates would say "oh yeah I am for sure a psychopath always have been and always will be" and then turn right back around and get on the phone with their significant other on the outside and Fall to pieces when they find out that that cornerstone of their life on the outside has decided to move on and make something better out of their own life because you can't seem to pull his s*** together.
And then the same dude turns right around and says "well f*** that b**** because I'm a total psychopath and I don't care" and it's like: dude you were just weeping over the phone to this chick telling her you love her and can't live without her and will do anything you have to do to change to keep her." So, no, I don't buy your claim of being truly a psychopath. I think it's more likely that either you have some severe codependency issues or are just trying to manipulate her into putting money on your books and on your phone and on your JPay which goes right along with being stuck in a criminal mindset which seems to be more prevalent and neurotypical people, but again I'm not diagnostician or a psychologist so that's just my personal opinion based on observation. And then they want to argue the point and say well how do you know know what's what I don't I'm simply going off of what I've read and I'm not going to argue about the point given the fact that we obviously are not going to see eye to eye on the issue. I just simply disagree with it.
I can probably be mistaken on a lot of what I'm saying and if I am feel free to point it out and correct me because as I said I know only a little bit about the psychopathic brain and mindset and way of thinking. I find it interesting to be sure, but I agree I don't think it's something that needs to be advocated for or anybody needs to take social issues with it. As the man said, it is simply what it is.
A psychopath might very well say those things and act that way on the phone trying to keep their source of funding alive, but if unsuccessful they wouldn't be mad about it, they would just shrug and say, "Well, that's not an option anymore. Guess I need another revenue stream, that one's gone."
Also, psychopaths don't need to feel the need to flex their psychopathy. Usually just dropping the mask for a short period of time is enough to let others know that there is something off about that individual, and to maybe not cross them. Most of the time when a mask drop is intentional and for effect, it is very... well... effective.
The genuine psychopaths are the ones that seem very affable, until they aren't, but they aren't going to brag about that. They don't need to.
I wonder if maybe part of psychopaths actually arrives to conclussion they are schizoids because popular image of a psychopath is just unrecognizable. And yeah, schizoid is adaptatiton to adverse circumstances and emotiona life and yearning is numbed out as defense, there is often sensitivity under numbness. But you find folks who argue that their case is simply "not needing people, just performing the barest minimum so their lives are easier" and since there is some debate on whether schizoid experience includes only suppressed needs or lack of needs, it seems likely to me, that fleeting look at the condition could paint a picture similar to psychopath's experience and part of folks who identify as schizoids or even got diagnosed somewhere could be in fact mislabeled psychopaths.
It seems to be the opposite really. I have seen a lot of people that have SPD insist that they are psychopathic. Several have written copious answers over on Quora stating that they are psychopathic because they have diagnosed themselves as such. Because they self-diagnosed they write things that are dramatically out of line for psychopathy, but instead of reconsidering that they might be wrong, they defend their position vehemently, only to be diagnosed with SPD by a professional later on.
Schizoid personality disorder is not relatable to a psychopath. It doesn't sound remotely similar to our way of thinking or experiencing the world. The other way around, however, happens frequently.
My thoughts on the emotions of schizoids is that we know, from Elinor Greenbergs discussions. That schizoids are massively new age and such. I wonder if the new age element, the dream interpretation, the meditation etc. Is all to do with them accessing their own emotions?
Past a "force" within themselves which is obviously suppressing themselves. Could it be that schizoid is the less advanced version of psychopathy? That the emotions live behind a veil that in the psychopaths is one hundred times stronger?
Which would put schizoids and psychopaths in a separate category from NPD, BPD and neurotypical?
I don't know how one would distinguish between a schizoid or psychopath that lives alone and does not have enough interaction with others to distinguish their behaviours.
Interesting. For some reason this reminds me of a game called, The Chant. I wonder if it is sort of an allegory for SPD. Now I need to replay it with that in mind.
I think a lot of mental health things have mythological links in our culture. Narcissism seems to have a kind of mythological leaning.
I know you said you don't watch tv because you don't link to the characters. But Rick and Morty is a good one for this kind of mythology working itself out. The episodes are only twenty minutes and they are action packed like a video game.
Through wiring. How does their brain fire and whar sizes are the individual regions, how they process oxytocin. Interestingly, autism apparently can come with some alternation to receptors of oxytocin. Less advanced psychopathy sounds like subclinical borderline psychopathy to me, not fully there, only halfway.
Now there seems to be some genetic predisposition to SPD too, someone is just more likely to develop it and it often comes with having a relative with schizophrenic condition. While there is some internal non-conformity and propensity for intelectual processing and dissmisive attachment style (where psychopaths don't attach at all), I am not sure how much that lives in neighbourhood of psychopathy and how much it is just similar result with different roots and internal structure. Cause both plane and hot-air baloon fly but they fly very differently. I think individual SPDs might have different reasons for isolation and diff experienc of that isolation and that might place them at different distance from psychopathy. Some might be beside this higher in those traits, some lower and the SPD adaptaton would exist within them irregardless. But there is ertain permeability running counter to psychopathy.
OK, well having spent a long time with a borderline previously. I would not think those two conditions were in any way related.
Borderlines are extremely emotional. Every tiny statement to them is an insult. They exist in this netherworld where they seem to be incredibly sweet, soft, marshmellow like. Then they get incredibly angry, shocking people when they do - not scary angry just get over emotional and go on rants that are so far removed from reality they are a bit jarring. They are excessive victims, excessively emotional, excessively self concerned with their own internal image. "Yearning" is part of how they are defined.
There is nothing in that description that is anywhere near how I would define a psychopath.
I have no further thoughts on psychopathy and schizoid. It was just that... a thought. Without access to either large amounts of people with these conditions or clinical literature of some sort. Or at the very least someone else with those things floating the theories. I have no power to gain insight, or to prove that thought one way of the other.
Psychopathy, or a concept that they see reflected in psychopathy when they read about psychopathy, might be what SPD wants as a solution to its experience of vulnerability. It strives for impenetrability and tells itself that withdrawal is the deal where a real psychopath does not need to put any distance between temselves and anything, because even up close and right in the midde of storm they remain ontouched by default. Where SPD wants that impenetrability so badly because at first there was an experience of the opposite. That might be the reason why that recognition is a one-way road, SPDs identify as psychopaths, but not the other way around.
I dunno. I might be SPD. In fact I have had an informal diagnosis of a schizophrenic spectrum condition. I wondered a little if I was a psychopath when I first came on here.
There is a LOT going into this including that I have a medical condition that messes with my blood chemistry/ hormones etc. and I get quite confused sometimes. There is a certain amount of discomfort when I deal with others and realise they are processing things emotionally and that I am simply not on that wavelength at all - so I look for solutions at this time. A few other things. Plus, I would be surprised if my father was not a psychopath. I have had discussions with him and he did not seem to be able to process other peoples existence. But he did not have the vulnerability of the SPD. Moreso, he did have the confidence of the psychopath and he did a lot of illegal stuff for kicks. He did not have the fear of the SPD.
SPD has a huge imagination and jumps from idea to idea, which is another potential reason for this connection for them. I wouldn't reflexively agree to your logical process there.
I did hit an emotion the other day after pages and pages of dream interpretation! So I could not technically tell you if you were right that as you surmised is my emotional process and I am not aware of it. But I do not think that to be the case.
If you mean that my proposed striving for look-alike-psychopathy is contradicting search for emotion, well... That could be explained through the fact that unlike psychopathic inborn wiring, SPD's state might not be perfectly comfortable and so there is counter reaction to that. For some sanctum of dissociated state verges on utter derealization which is another form of the very annihilation which threatened them first. For some something is missing and so they go and search for hits of emotions and ways to venture out of fortifications, only to often be pulled back by something reflexive or pushed back by overwhelm or the atrophied mechanism is weak. Someone might not be low on emotion because of SPD, but devolep SPD partly because of having alexithymia first. And someone else with alexithymia might wonder if they are an SPD all the while actually not being an SPD. Maybe.
Regarding jumps from idea to idea and making connections... Do you mean to say tht they came to think they were psychopaths simply because they considered what most people considered not? Well, that could be a portion of it certainly. I was digging more into the likelyhood of becoming convinced they for sure are psychopath instead of something else and how psychopathic side just does not see it. But good remark on that searching mode, because the search alone can yield insights into human nature that most people subscribe to and so psychopathic condition might seem like an explanation of this dissonance between what the rest of people report and an SPD individual sees.
I fully admit to simply brainstorming now with just some stuff I read in past and no way to go getting an actual evidence now.
But beside Elinor I can refer you to a book, which describes various ways people tried to make heads and tails out of SPD and lists some phenomenons that came from case studies and attempts to solve their issues.
It also talks about how heightened introversion can lead a person to take apart their internsl processes so much they find them more artifficial and arests their pontaneity. Which is a thing associated with SPD. Could be contributing factor, propensity for a habit that increases likelyhood of winding up SPD eventually.
Yes, I think your first paragraph there is a suitable explanation. However, in my mind you are talking from a very objective place where as someone on the schizophrenic spectrum does not always show massive objective thinking. We are talking about a condition here that at its worse thinks that the CIA put microphones in their fillings. So they could make leaps that are not easy for most to understand.
A side note here is that I do think it is a spectrum. It's just that insurance companies need clear delineations, but as the guy from Schizoid angst described with Elinor, a lot of schizoids have a lot of things to worry about that don't worry most people. Such as "Am I doing what god wants of me?" and they all seem to have a severely delusional break at one point in their lives (so temporary schizotypal/ schizophrenic etc.). So this hints that there is a spectrum.
I do think the dissociative state can be traumatising to the extent that they believe themselves to not have any emotions. The girl from last week who said she was a psychopath and went out and killed animals after her grandfather raped her at seven years old. She said there was schizophrenia in her genetic line. So it could easily be that she got raped. The schizoid emotional system did not emote properly over this. She thought "Why do I not have emotion about this?" But it was all going on underneath. Theorised she was a psychopath and things went from there. With people on that spectrum things become compulsive as well, which is another can of worms.
There is disagreement as well about whether borderline is on the borderline of psychopathy or psychosis.
Thanks for the link. I will bookmark it if needed. My physiology needs to settle after what has been going on for the past few years. I am going through healing pains of a sort. It is a weird process because a lot of the physiologically created anxiety became part of my personality and as that falls away, I am a different person in some ways.
While I realise that you are someone that understands the potential pitfalls. If a movement was to be created, a hypothetical education on psychopaths movement, then, like all movements it would have to have someone at the helm, or a group at the helm, that was capable of navigating most of these things. As would have to be the case with most social movements that could form.
Powerful movements are usually formed around someone that is absolutely exceptional and knowledgeable as a person. For instance, the guy that fronted Project Veritas who was then thrown out of it; used to have a passionate ability to convert others to supporting his truths and worked consistently something like 14 hours a day while sleeping at work. There are various other exceptional individuals that either have, or could, form social movements.
Men experience a strong biologically designed weakness for women. Because there is nothing a woman could do before the creation of the state that really makes women a true threat so if a guy is being manipulated, it is probably to either be tricked into having children, supporting children, or supporting group tribal politics in a way that is likely beneficial to his genetics.
BUT, there are quite a lot of men who are immune to women, and liars in general, for whatever reason. Whether that be just extremely high intelligence. Very good parenting from rich families including knowledge of how to manipulate others. Do you think Donald Trump would be able to be able to be manipulated by such things? Someone that has done successful business in places where the mafia operate; and has successfully navigated the political class. Never being called racist of course until he ran against the Democrats.
There are a few other points here. I understand the "lack of tribal connection" point, but, if psychopaths are 1% of the population that is about 80 million people. The officially given population number of Germany or thereabouts. There will be some individual variation there. Real people with these diagnosis, since they are people as well as psychopaths; will have a large amount of variation. They will have some things that don't quite fit. There will be those with some aspects of psychopathy but not quite qualifying for the diagnosis that is not in that 80 million number. Plus there are those that have had family, or friends, that are psychopaths but are not psychopaths themselves who might be motivated/ incentivised to work in this area.
What is the potential upside of better understanding of 80 million human beings?
I do think though, that there is a reason outside all of these that it might not be well advised. Although such things cannot truly be known it is likely, to me, that we will be entering a time of large political and economic changes that dwarf any potential psychopathy education movement. A large part of the world is no longer trading in dollars and there are a lot of other developments happening. I truly believe things might be rewired so completely we will have to gain our bearings a bit. But I do not see a reason to discount a psychopathy advocacy movement in theory.
The question of whether psychopathy, or anything else for that matter, should impact sentencing is an interesting one. If we assume that a sentence should simply be directly proportional to how bad the crime was and nothing more, then I would agree with you.
However, I see a big issue here. This notion assumes that punishment as such is the main point of a legal system. I would argue that this is not very practical. If I want to be relatively safe in a society, I would much rather prefer to have a legal system that optimizes for minimizing the probability of <bad thing> recurring, rather than just sitting as a moral arbiter for resolving disputes and dealing with crimes in a whack-a-mole manner. I would even go further and say that outcomes should be its sole objective, the morality of punishment is but aesthetics.
If we take such point of view, then neuroscience becomes very relevant as, while someone’s inner workings don’t matter to what has already happened, they absolutely have everything to do with what happens next - how likely the person is to reoffend, do different types of punishment or attempts at reforming them decrease or increase that probability, etc. Even if we assume free will, someone’s brain structure and functioning certainly influences the probability distributions. And, if the objective is “does this work” instead of “does it match how immoral what they did was”, free will hardly even matters. I’d be really curious to see how the field of neurolaw develops in the future.
Psychopathy should not be considered in any sort of sentencing either way. How is a neurotypical who feels his victim deserved death better or worse than a psychopath was saw a personal advantage from a killing?
I agree
Hi Invisigoth.
There’s no difference in my mind between the neurotypical who kills and the psychopath who kills. End result is the same, they both killed.
I think the psychopathy diagnosis might influence sentencing because people imagine that it is the psychopathy that caused the psychopath to kill. Psychopathy can’t be ‘cured’ ( it’s seen as a disorder in the majority perspective) so the perceived risk of re offence would be seen to be higher.
The neurotypical would be perceived as having the potential for rehabilitation so I think it’s this part that makes the difference in the mind of many.
The problem I think comes right at the start of that thinking and it’s the idea that ‘psychopathy made him do it.’ Psychopathy being seen as the sole driver or, ‘if he hadn’t been a psychopath he wouldn’t have killed.’ That’s where the stigma around psychopathy comes into play I think. It’s that perception that ‘all psychopaths are evil’ that still sits front and centre in the minds of many people. It’s the same idea over and over, that being ‘all killers are psychopaths.’
To clarify, this is not my view, but I do think it is the view of many.
Possibly also that this offender is seen as more dangerous (capable and not hesitant) than neurotypical offender.
I always found that to be shortsighted. A psychopath will not kill or offend due to high emotional impulse, but many crimes are committed in such a state.
Even if a person wanted to provide information, relative to murders, killings, state of mind and such, there are no statue of limitations: All info is from those caught and in prison. The system prevents non-prisoners from coming forward.
Puritanical roots, not very enlightened by New Testament:
Paul was a murderer, of church people: Yet the Good Christians helped him escape by lowering him, in a basket, out of the city. Colorful imagery!
Moses, a very central figure, killed an Eygptian slave owner and covered up his body, though not very successfully. He fled but returned some years later. There was no "warrant" though he was certainly known "killer".
King David, a man "after God's own heart", murdered Uriah (along with his crew) because David got Bathseba pregnant, while she was married to Uriah.
Most Evangelicals feel they will join murderers Paul, Moses, and David, in eternal bliss. They will all speak English and make even Uriah wear Red Hats.
Yet in the name of religion and violence and vengeance, they (USA) reverse and insist those who kill or murder take it to the grave.
Speaking of colorful imagery: "...when I was a toxic little beastie and got into all kinds of trouble." -smiles-
At some point, for some reason, you made some changes. I did the same. And continue to do so now.
Thanks again for your work and patience to keep at the wheel.
Doesn't matter all that much why (well, to emotionally minded does, but I focus here on more practical component (which can lie also underneath obvious emotional reaction to cold-blooded acts)), more like, how likely they are to do it again and how likely they are to execute it in a way that no one sees coming and they do not get caught for. As in... Those who do decide to start using killing as their method to get things (or mysteriously somehow find something in the killing (much rarer occurance, but I think it wasn't ruled out as totally impossible in these circles)) would be highly undeterrable. A position which runs into problem with single-time killings when some neurotypical's reserves broke under pressure and those with chronically criminal lifestyle because the second case would be just as highly undeterrable. But then again, that is what they put in the same box as your neurological variant. It also runs into fact that emotionally reactive people might develop transgressive pattern based on emotionality, just not all, could be a minority. Yeah, it is a mire. Just tried to put my finger on where it could be coming from.
Most neurotypicals that kill for emotional reasons are no less likely to repeat that pattern of behavior when they are confronted with a situation that challenges their emotions again.
You have done it again! Reconfirmed what I learned along the way during my life with a psychopath. What you have written here, from my observation and years trying to figure out my partner's way of thinking, you have stated to a "T". He was not quite as clear spoken as you are about psychopathy, nor was he able to explain as you do, but none-the-less, you explain to me over and over what psychopathy is, and I am so thankful for the knowledge you have shared.
Explaining psychopathy in a way that is relatable is a difficult task, so I can understand why there isn't a lot of information available about it. I suppose having an interest in writing, having high cognitive empathy, and the availability of other people to give me their perspectives have sort of come together in an interesting way.
Do you have any posts about how you were when you were younger? You come across as too perfect and this causes people to idealize psychopathy. Maybe you're not revealing too much about yourself for your own protection but it would be interesting to hear about your toxic little beastie times.
Not a whole lot, no, because as I have mentioned in the past, I don't have an interest in sharing identifying information. I don't know how I come across as perfect as I readily speak about faults, screwups, and other negative aspects of who I am.
Indeed you do. Maybe it's how we perceive your unflappable nature, confidence... or because you lack shame and guilt when you talk about your screw ups and without that component we don't assign any magnitude.
I'd like to hear about that part of your life too. To have a better understanding of what a so-called low functioning psychopath is. A comparison within a single person might give a better illustration.
I'd be also interested about the transition phase. What's the motivation behind, what did you have to learn and how did you do it? For example, you mentioned an impulse control as one, but then also which perspective did you change (if any), how and why?
All right, I will consider addressing that in more detail
That would be very interesting to read
The thing I got from this post, isn't that advocacy is wrong, but rather that with society's current understanding of psychopathy, there are going to be consequences in doing so. Who knows how societal attitudes will be in the future.
Quite true, but there would need to be a great deal of change in the way psychopathy is handled to prevent a number of possible negative outcomes.
I enjoyed this post. As usual, you went down every corridor that I might want to peak into. I do wonder about something you would be uniquely perfect for and whether it is something you’d be interested in. It’s got to do with AI. I don’t have enough room here to go into all the specifics, but I can easily image your as a special consultant to one of the major AI companies. Have you thought about psychopathy in a world full of AI? What if AI could be programmed to emulate the most useful parts of being a psychopath? It’s fascinating to think about, and could provide you with a very interesting opportunity.
I actually have a friend that does AI development and used me as a reference point for AI training. I suppose to pursue something like that I would hit him up again and see what the landscape looks like.
Interesting! I hope your friend paid you well! If it’s something you’d be interested in doing at a high level, email me (you have my email) and let’s talk about it. I may have some great connections for this. Also, interestingly enough, the reason your post clicked with me right now is because I’m rereading an excellent book titled FranKissStein which deals with a lot of important aspects of AI and I was trying to find a quote I remembered from the book about being trans. I have a trans friend who I wanted to give the quote to. The quote is in this section: “I am part of a small group of transgender medical professionals. Some of us are transhuman enthusiasts too. That isn’t surprising; we feel or have felt that we’re in the wrong body. We can understand the feeling that any-body is the wrong body.” I was struck by this idea. Reading your post, while reading this book, made something click for me. It made me think about how AI is going to resemble (or not) neurotypical behavior and how beneficial it would be for AI to have some psychopathic behavior or processing or something given the potential benefits of that. Read FranKissStein by Jeanette Winterson for more to think about on this topic (as well as a really great work of literature spanning from Frankenstein to AI today, wrapped in a unique love story of sorts. Now I’m going to think more about this angle.
It could be interesting, but I would need more information prior to knowing whether or not it interested me.
Do you still have my email address? If you want to explore this, email me. Obviously this isn’t something that people are actively looking for (that I know of) so I would have to create pitch, etc. I think I could do it, but we need to chat.
I do indeed
I agree on your point that it would be beneficial to consider psychopathy in AI modelling/research. In this aspect I think of a psychopathy as an anomaly, that can tech us a great deal about a neurotypical world.
I'm trying to think of a way to model an emotional feedback system, Athena have been previously writing about[1]. Why are we so dependent on it (on inner workings level) and why it makes us feel the way she described in the absence of it? Model an open vs. closed feedback system and there's your answer.
Easier said than done but ping me if I sparked your interest or if you can point me in the right direction.
[1] https://athenawalker.substack.com/p/the-mask?utm_source=%2Fsearch%2Flibrary&utm_medium=reader2
We NT's/most humans would be "dependent on an emotional feedback system" because it was useful evolution-wise. Survival of the most relevant? So the question would be how an emotional feedback system contributed to survival and therefore opportunities to reproduce.
This answer seems clear. Since memories are "attached" to emotions in NTs, then so is learning. And learning to avoid dangerous situations would be linked to memories of events that induce fear.
For psychopaths, a similar question would be how the lack of an emotional feedback system would contribute to survival (and thus opportunities for reproduction). I can see an answer here as related to lack of fear enabling higher level of brave responses contributing to winning fights. (Or losing them to bigger/stronger predators.)
Also perhaps lack of fear during the childhood learning period might lead to more exposure to danger and therefore fewer survivors. I'm reminded here of animal documentaries that track various kinds of families where the braver youngsters don't always manage to avoid the dangerous snakes and other lethal opportunities. So perhaps that would account for the statistics re percentage of psychopaths in the human population.
Interesting food for thought, anyway.
I wonder what would happen if you take all Athena's answers on Quora and used it to train an AI model to predict what her answers would be for new questions.
My guess is that it would be lacking dept because training AI would require a much bigger database
Yes, there would need to be a commitment to neurodiversity, but Athena and her database would be the best possible first steps to add to the AI training mix.
Here’s some interesting topic discussions to think about; why a psychopath wouldn’t want to romantically be with another psychopath, and when an empath is more reliable, and keeps you more safe than a high functioning psychopath can.🤍
That's an interesting idea. However, I think it comes down too personal preference and what the individual is looking for in a relationship. The different types of people provide very different things and expect very different things.
Too bad you can’t be yourself 100% when you are around non-psychopaths, that must get old after awhile…Is the mask tiring around them?
Yes, quite so
Having served more than one prison sentence, I actually kind of found it a little bit amusing when the other people serving their time for their collective crime would tell each other that they were bona fide psychopaths.
Now, I'm not saying that there were no actual psychopaths out of all the people that have been in prison with because I'm sure that they're probably were but I would have no way of knowing as I am not a clinical diagnostician and I only know a little bit about psychopathy based on what I've read so I would have no way of judging the validity of their claims.
However, I have gathered based on what I've read that true psychopaths aren't wired for things like empathy, sympathy, and they don't process oxytocin the same way that we neurotypically do providing a basis for love as we NTS know it.
All of that said, the thing that I found amusing, is when one of the other inmates would say "oh yeah I am for sure a psychopath always have been and always will be" and then turn right back around and get on the phone with their significant other on the outside and Fall to pieces when they find out that that cornerstone of their life on the outside has decided to move on and make something better out of their own life because you can't seem to pull his s*** together.
And then the same dude turns right around and says "well f*** that b**** because I'm a total psychopath and I don't care" and it's like: dude you were just weeping over the phone to this chick telling her you love her and can't live without her and will do anything you have to do to change to keep her." So, no, I don't buy your claim of being truly a psychopath. I think it's more likely that either you have some severe codependency issues or are just trying to manipulate her into putting money on your books and on your phone and on your JPay which goes right along with being stuck in a criminal mindset which seems to be more prevalent and neurotypical people, but again I'm not diagnostician or a psychologist so that's just my personal opinion based on observation. And then they want to argue the point and say well how do you know know what's what I don't I'm simply going off of what I've read and I'm not going to argue about the point given the fact that we obviously are not going to see eye to eye on the issue. I just simply disagree with it.
I can probably be mistaken on a lot of what I'm saying and if I am feel free to point it out and correct me because as I said I know only a little bit about the psychopathic brain and mindset and way of thinking. I find it interesting to be sure, but I agree I don't think it's something that needs to be advocated for or anybody needs to take social issues with it. As the man said, it is simply what it is.
You are correct.
A psychopath might very well say those things and act that way on the phone trying to keep their source of funding alive, but if unsuccessful they wouldn't be mad about it, they would just shrug and say, "Well, that's not an option anymore. Guess I need another revenue stream, that one's gone."
Also, psychopaths don't need to feel the need to flex their psychopathy. Usually just dropping the mask for a short period of time is enough to let others know that there is something off about that individual, and to maybe not cross them. Most of the time when a mask drop is intentional and for effect, it is very... well... effective.
The genuine psychopaths are the ones that seem very affable, until they aren't, but they aren't going to brag about that. They don't need to.
Okay, that is kind of the way I figured it was.
Off topic...
I wonder if maybe part of psychopaths actually arrives to conclussion they are schizoids because popular image of a psychopath is just unrecognizable. And yeah, schizoid is adaptatiton to adverse circumstances and emotiona life and yearning is numbed out as defense, there is often sensitivity under numbness. But you find folks who argue that their case is simply "not needing people, just performing the barest minimum so their lives are easier" and since there is some debate on whether schizoid experience includes only suppressed needs or lack of needs, it seems likely to me, that fleeting look at the condition could paint a picture similar to psychopath's experience and part of folks who identify as schizoids or even got diagnosed somewhere could be in fact mislabeled psychopaths.
E.g. this thread is a bit like it - https://www.reddit.com/r/Schizoid/comments/16mkgat/anyone_else_talk_to_people_just_for_entertainment/
It seems to be the opposite really. I have seen a lot of people that have SPD insist that they are psychopathic. Several have written copious answers over on Quora stating that they are psychopathic because they have diagnosed themselves as such. Because they self-diagnosed they write things that are dramatically out of line for psychopathy, but instead of reconsidering that they might be wrong, they defend their position vehemently, only to be diagnosed with SPD by a professional later on.
Schizoid personality disorder is not relatable to a psychopath. It doesn't sound remotely similar to our way of thinking or experiencing the world. The other way around, however, happens frequently.
My thoughts on the emotions of schizoids is that we know, from Elinor Greenbergs discussions. That schizoids are massively new age and such. I wonder if the new age element, the dream interpretation, the meditation etc. Is all to do with them accessing their own emotions?
Past a "force" within themselves which is obviously suppressing themselves. Could it be that schizoid is the less advanced version of psychopathy? That the emotions live behind a veil that in the psychopaths is one hundred times stronger?
Which would put schizoids and psychopaths in a separate category from NPD, BPD and neurotypical?
I don't know how one would distinguish between a schizoid or psychopath that lives alone and does not have enough interaction with others to distinguish their behaviours.
Interesting. For some reason this reminds me of a game called, The Chant. I wonder if it is sort of an allegory for SPD. Now I need to replay it with that in mind.
I think a lot of mental health things have mythological links in our culture. Narcissism seems to have a kind of mythological leaning.
I know you said you don't watch tv because you don't link to the characters. But Rick and Morty is a good one for this kind of mythology working itself out. The episodes are only twenty minutes and they are action packed like a video game.
Through wiring. How does their brain fire and whar sizes are the individual regions, how they process oxytocin. Interestingly, autism apparently can come with some alternation to receptors of oxytocin. Less advanced psychopathy sounds like subclinical borderline psychopathy to me, not fully there, only halfway.
Now there seems to be some genetic predisposition to SPD too, someone is just more likely to develop it and it often comes with having a relative with schizophrenic condition. While there is some internal non-conformity and propensity for intelectual processing and dissmisive attachment style (where psychopaths don't attach at all), I am not sure how much that lives in neighbourhood of psychopathy and how much it is just similar result with different roots and internal structure. Cause both plane and hot-air baloon fly but they fly very differently. I think individual SPDs might have different reasons for isolation and diff experienc of that isolation and that might place them at different distance from psychopathy. Some might be beside this higher in those traits, some lower and the SPD adaptaton would exist within them irregardless. But there is ertain permeability running counter to psychopathy.
OK, well having spent a long time with a borderline previously. I would not think those two conditions were in any way related.
Borderlines are extremely emotional. Every tiny statement to them is an insult. They exist in this netherworld where they seem to be incredibly sweet, soft, marshmellow like. Then they get incredibly angry, shocking people when they do - not scary angry just get over emotional and go on rants that are so far removed from reality they are a bit jarring. They are excessive victims, excessively emotional, excessively self concerned with their own internal image. "Yearning" is part of how they are defined.
There is nothing in that description that is anywhere near how I would define a psychopath.
I have no further thoughts on psychopathy and schizoid. It was just that... a thought. Without access to either large amounts of people with these conditions or clinical literature of some sort. Or at the very least someone else with those things floating the theories. I have no power to gain insight, or to prove that thought one way of the other.
Psychopathy, or a concept that they see reflected in psychopathy when they read about psychopathy, might be what SPD wants as a solution to its experience of vulnerability. It strives for impenetrability and tells itself that withdrawal is the deal where a real psychopath does not need to put any distance between temselves and anything, because even up close and right in the midde of storm they remain ontouched by default. Where SPD wants that impenetrability so badly because at first there was an experience of the opposite. That might be the reason why that recognition is a one-way road, SPDs identify as psychopaths, but not the other way around.
I dunno. I might be SPD. In fact I have had an informal diagnosis of a schizophrenic spectrum condition. I wondered a little if I was a psychopath when I first came on here.
There is a LOT going into this including that I have a medical condition that messes with my blood chemistry/ hormones etc. and I get quite confused sometimes. There is a certain amount of discomfort when I deal with others and realise they are processing things emotionally and that I am simply not on that wavelength at all - so I look for solutions at this time. A few other things. Plus, I would be surprised if my father was not a psychopath. I have had discussions with him and he did not seem to be able to process other peoples existence. But he did not have the vulnerability of the SPD. Moreso, he did have the confidence of the psychopath and he did a lot of illegal stuff for kicks. He did not have the fear of the SPD.
SPD has a huge imagination and jumps from idea to idea, which is another potential reason for this connection for them. I wouldn't reflexively agree to your logical process there.
I did hit an emotion the other day after pages and pages of dream interpretation! So I could not technically tell you if you were right that as you surmised is my emotional process and I am not aware of it. But I do not think that to be the case.
If you mean that my proposed striving for look-alike-psychopathy is contradicting search for emotion, well... That could be explained through the fact that unlike psychopathic inborn wiring, SPD's state might not be perfectly comfortable and so there is counter reaction to that. For some sanctum of dissociated state verges on utter derealization which is another form of the very annihilation which threatened them first. For some something is missing and so they go and search for hits of emotions and ways to venture out of fortifications, only to often be pulled back by something reflexive or pushed back by overwhelm or the atrophied mechanism is weak. Someone might not be low on emotion because of SPD, but devolep SPD partly because of having alexithymia first. And someone else with alexithymia might wonder if they are an SPD all the while actually not being an SPD. Maybe.
Regarding jumps from idea to idea and making connections... Do you mean to say tht they came to think they were psychopaths simply because they considered what most people considered not? Well, that could be a portion of it certainly. I was digging more into the likelyhood of becoming convinced they for sure are psychopath instead of something else and how psychopathic side just does not see it. But good remark on that searching mode, because the search alone can yield insights into human nature that most people subscribe to and so psychopathic condition might seem like an explanation of this dissonance between what the rest of people report and an SPD individual sees.
I fully admit to simply brainstorming now with just some stuff I read in past and no way to go getting an actual evidence now.
But beside Elinor I can refer you to a book, which describes various ways people tried to make heads and tails out of SPD and lists some phenomenons that came from case studies and attempts to solve their issues.
It also talks about how heightened introversion can lead a person to take apart their internsl processes so much they find them more artifficial and arests their pontaneity. Which is a thing associated with SPD. Could be contributing factor, propensity for a habit that increases likelyhood of winding up SPD eventually.
chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1412&context=etd
Yes, I think your first paragraph there is a suitable explanation. However, in my mind you are talking from a very objective place where as someone on the schizophrenic spectrum does not always show massive objective thinking. We are talking about a condition here that at its worse thinks that the CIA put microphones in their fillings. So they could make leaps that are not easy for most to understand.
A side note here is that I do think it is a spectrum. It's just that insurance companies need clear delineations, but as the guy from Schizoid angst described with Elinor, a lot of schizoids have a lot of things to worry about that don't worry most people. Such as "Am I doing what god wants of me?" and they all seem to have a severely delusional break at one point in their lives (so temporary schizotypal/ schizophrenic etc.). So this hints that there is a spectrum.
I do think the dissociative state can be traumatising to the extent that they believe themselves to not have any emotions. The girl from last week who said she was a psychopath and went out and killed animals after her grandfather raped her at seven years old. She said there was schizophrenia in her genetic line. So it could easily be that she got raped. The schizoid emotional system did not emote properly over this. She thought "Why do I not have emotion about this?" But it was all going on underneath. Theorised she was a psychopath and things went from there. With people on that spectrum things become compulsive as well, which is another can of worms.
There is disagreement as well about whether borderline is on the borderline of psychopathy or psychosis.
Thanks for the link. I will bookmark it if needed. My physiology needs to settle after what has been going on for the past few years. I am going through healing pains of a sort. It is a weird process because a lot of the physiologically created anxiety became part of my personality and as that falls away, I am a different person in some ways.
I agree with that spectrum thing.
Good luck with your recovery.
I don't agree.
While I realise that you are someone that understands the potential pitfalls. If a movement was to be created, a hypothetical education on psychopaths movement, then, like all movements it would have to have someone at the helm, or a group at the helm, that was capable of navigating most of these things. As would have to be the case with most social movements that could form.
Powerful movements are usually formed around someone that is absolutely exceptional and knowledgeable as a person. For instance, the guy that fronted Project Veritas who was then thrown out of it; used to have a passionate ability to convert others to supporting his truths and worked consistently something like 14 hours a day while sleeping at work. There are various other exceptional individuals that either have, or could, form social movements.
Men experience a strong biologically designed weakness for women. Because there is nothing a woman could do before the creation of the state that really makes women a true threat so if a guy is being manipulated, it is probably to either be tricked into having children, supporting children, or supporting group tribal politics in a way that is likely beneficial to his genetics.
BUT, there are quite a lot of men who are immune to women, and liars in general, for whatever reason. Whether that be just extremely high intelligence. Very good parenting from rich families including knowledge of how to manipulate others. Do you think Donald Trump would be able to be able to be manipulated by such things? Someone that has done successful business in places where the mafia operate; and has successfully navigated the political class. Never being called racist of course until he ran against the Democrats.
There are a few other points here. I understand the "lack of tribal connection" point, but, if psychopaths are 1% of the population that is about 80 million people. The officially given population number of Germany or thereabouts. There will be some individual variation there. Real people with these diagnosis, since they are people as well as psychopaths; will have a large amount of variation. They will have some things that don't quite fit. There will be those with some aspects of psychopathy but not quite qualifying for the diagnosis that is not in that 80 million number. Plus there are those that have had family, or friends, that are psychopaths but are not psychopaths themselves who might be motivated/ incentivised to work in this area.
What is the potential upside of better understanding of 80 million human beings?
I do think though, that there is a reason outside all of these that it might not be well advised. Although such things cannot truly be known it is likely, to me, that we will be entering a time of large political and economic changes that dwarf any potential psychopathy education movement. A large part of the world is no longer trading in dollars and there are a lot of other developments happening. I truly believe things might be rewired so completely we will have to gain our bearings a bit. But I do not see a reason to discount a psychopathy advocacy movement in theory.
Noted ✅
The question of whether psychopathy, or anything else for that matter, should impact sentencing is an interesting one. If we assume that a sentence should simply be directly proportional to how bad the crime was and nothing more, then I would agree with you.
However, I see a big issue here. This notion assumes that punishment as such is the main point of a legal system. I would argue that this is not very practical. If I want to be relatively safe in a society, I would much rather prefer to have a legal system that optimizes for minimizing the probability of <bad thing> recurring, rather than just sitting as a moral arbiter for resolving disputes and dealing with crimes in a whack-a-mole manner. I would even go further and say that outcomes should be its sole objective, the morality of punishment is but aesthetics.
If we take such point of view, then neuroscience becomes very relevant as, while someone’s inner workings don’t matter to what has already happened, they absolutely have everything to do with what happens next - how likely the person is to reoffend, do different types of punishment or attempts at reforming them decrease or increase that probability, etc. Even if we assume free will, someone’s brain structure and functioning certainly influences the probability distributions. And, if the objective is “does this work” instead of “does it match how immoral what they did was”, free will hardly even matters. I’d be really curious to see how the field of neurolaw develops in the future.
Also worth checking out https://eagleman.com/podcast/what-should-happen-when-someone-with-a-brain-tumor-breaks-the-law/. Don’t know if you’re familiar with David Eagleman, a neuroscience professor at Stanford, but he makes the argument for this much better than I could.