Criminal justice researcher/licensed California therapist here. Here is "Patric Gagne's" real personal and professional identify as far as can be gleaned. Her real name is Patricia J Cagle (if anything about her is verifiably real) not Dr. Patricia Gagne. Notably, she did not file a "fictitious business name" in California to operate her clinical practice under a fictitious name. She wrote both her her Modern Love and memoir under a fictitious name and identity. She has conflicting explanations for why her name is "Patric" not Patricia. Clever but deceptive. She told the highly credulous NYT David Marchese that she she shortened her name to appear more "masculine than feminine." Her actual performer website states that she changed her name to prevent her clients from knowing who she really is. Her acting profile states that her false identity is "so far working:""Patric" is also- looking at real information- an Improve theatre performer and claims that she hides her real identity so that her, presumably vulnerable psychotherapy clients, cannot find out anything about her real, private life. Her photos verify the actor and the author are the same woman. She may or may not have graduated from UCLA and received a BA, but records cannot be found. (I have an undergraduate degree from Yale-easily located as are my graduate degrees from University of San Francisco). Her graduate degree, is a PsyD, not a Phd. It was granted from a sketch graduate school in LA. She does appear to have a provider number but not under her name or identity and it may or may not be as a MA counselor or PsyD. It is critical to state that the REAL Dr. Gagne is a much older, eminent Dr. of Sociology with 72 major peer reviewed articles in gender studies and interesting subjects like motorcyclists. I wrote her to alert her. Other than Modern Love, I could not find a single reference to any articles, studies or any-general readership article/study/ essay or any evidence of advocacy. Lies.
She reminds me a bit of Elizabeth Holmes. She seems to be a "fake it till you make it" kind of gal. Those types always land on their feet. They just create a new persona.
When I read things like this I am always struck by the fact that good old Mk I neurotypical human beings can commit almost any atrocity that could be imagined with some prep time and with further planning actually feel good and justified about having done it.
In fact that's what would make a sociopath. You take an individual and place him or her in an environment where bad behavior can be justified in order to cope and you're on the way to making a sociopath.
On your first paragraph??? Wow. I think "yes"!!! exactly.
Do you mean like Jason Bourne in the series of movies? In the movies, he was trained to commit atrocity on behalf of government.
Burning witches. The Inquisition (all 300 years worth). etc etc etc. Right down to John McCain running with the Maverick for president!! hahaha.
But on a smaller level, in town, a church, a religion. It is all the same isn't it? There are religious groups, today, hoping for a civil war in USA so they can use some of them fancy toy soldier stuff they got. Not like that stuff is cheap. They want to try it out!!
In a family, I think Athena said this earlier: Constant criticism while withholding affection creates strange personalities. Best!
From what I understand about mental illness and neurological conditions, is that symptoms don't suddenly decide to fuck off when it's convenient. Wouldn't that be nice. Hey schizophrenics, did you know, you can choose when to have hallucinations! Hey ADHD people, you have a major project due next week, why don't you put that ADHD to the side and focus! Hey people with anxiety, make sure to time your panic attacks so that you don't accidentally kill someone while driving!
I think this is where people get confused, they display one or two symptoms once in a while, and they think they're mentally ill. If we applied the schizophrenia label to anyone who has ever experienced non-drug induced hallucinations ever, then the vast majority of the population would be schizophrenic.
That is the vibe I get from this article. She's a sociopath, unless it benefits her to not be. Honestly, it's entirely possible that she is a sociopath and that there is key information that we're missing that would confirm it. Based on the article alone however, are not points in her favour.
I am curious - where did you find that the majority of people have experienced at least one incidence of non-drug induced hallucinations. I didn't think it was that prevalent.
She appears full of shit: "insincere". Not in touch with the truth trying to help others.
Not "the" Donald, but certainly, "a" Donald.
Just simply a liar.
I can't seem to write down 'why'. I will try to find someone to ask over beers. It is a very bewildering subject, your past two episodes. Very enjoyable and make my brain race!! TY
I have another couple of articles I would like to do on sociopathy. I have been thinking about this a bit recently, and due to people's perpetual conflation between sociopathy and psychopathy I think I may need to put a bit more into posts that explores the differences.
Without knowledge of her childhood history, it's impossible to determine whether she has a legitimate diagnosis or is merely a poseur. I suspect the latter. Or, maybe she really believes it. If nothing else, she's beyond irritating.
That would be interesting to find out. In part, she came off as irritating because the interviewer seemed completely unprepared. Both seemed to have confused notions about what a sociopath actually is. But, since this woman claims to be not only a sociopath but also a mental health professional, I was dismayed by her lack of understanding. Maybe the book will clear things up.
I gather that she's quite attractive, so that could have affected Marchese's performance interviewing her. Again I'm reminded of Elizabeth Holmes, who didn't strike me as particularly attractive, but men found her to be so to such a degree that they handed over fortunes based on the most dubious claims. These were educated men, too!! Interestingly, women when approached by Holmes saw straight through her.
I am an actor and writer and I am currently writing a script on psychopathy. I understand that there has been a lot of misrepresentation in cinema regarding psychopaths and so I would like to ensure that my script is as accurate as possible.
My main question is what exactly would you like to see my script explore when it comes to psychopathy? My initial idea was to have three main characters: the psychopath, the girl (whether that be girlfriend or not I’m not sure) and her father. The psychopath (who is sort of inspired by James Fallon) is building his mask for society and meets the girl and becomes close with her. She represents society and what is the correct thing to believe and the father is a doctor who like Robert Hare misjudges and is very harsh with the psychopath and tries to influence his daughter into accepting his views, convincing her that he is guilty. She has to decide who to free from guilt and who to blame. I’ve titled it “Who to Free and Who to Blame”, inspired by Johnny Cash’s song “The Man Comes Around”.
Let me know what you think and if you have any adjustments (I’m sure there will be), I’ll make them for you. Thank you.
Ellie Smith is correct in directing you to the previous post about this. Neurotypicals need to leave psychopathy alone as most of the myths that surround it come from their own inability to understand it at a fundamental level.
Psychopaths are hard to write. Look at your script again and realize that if you do decide to write the script anyways despite Athena's wishes, you're going to have to come up with a reason why the psychopath would care about what the girl thinks of him. The reason cannot be because of love or any other type of emotional reason.
From a general writing perspective, having characters be symbols of entire groups of people runs the risk of creating caricatures of those groups. If psychopaths had a capability to be offended, you would run the risk of creating something highly offensive by doing this. This happens all the time with minority groups in general. As for a character being a symbol for society? Society is HIGHLY complex. How can one make a single character out of it? Whatever character you make will only represent what you think society is, and that will cause backlash depending on who your audience is. My advice? Focus on making your characters people rather than symbols.
That being said, your concept does sound intriguing. Perhaps it can be about how people treat those who are different. Maybe make the story in the point of view of the girl, saving you from having to explain a psychopath's internal mind. If you're making the father based on Robert Hare, maybe don't make the psychopath a real psychopath but rather someone who has the label of psychopath and make it a story about prejudice.
Thank you for sending me that link. I’ll read it now.
Regarding the psychopath’s motivation (I’ve named him Sam for now as part of my first draft), I planned on it being the same as Athena’s when it comes to her blog and Quora answers: to stop misinformation spreading. I’ve read about psychopaths having to work hard to build up their mask and how it can be exhausting to maintain it constantly.
Characters can be both people and symbols, that was what I meant, and you are right that it can be easy to fall into the trap of caricature, which is what I’m concerned about too. I’ll do my best to avoid it. Society is definitely complex, but I was thinking about how the perception of psychopaths in cinema has become quite generalized in the public that perhaps one person representing them would have a degree of accuracy. I could be wrong on that so feel free to correct me if so.
I like the idea you’ve presented about Sam potentially having the label of a psychopath instead, but I want to use this as an opportunity to clear up any misinterpretations of psychopaths installed in the public by cinema. I want to present something new to them.
I also like the idea of it being from the perspective of the girl (who I’ve called Emily) and it would save me the trouble of explaining Sam’s mind, but at the same time I feel like I wouldn’t do justice to the story’s message if I didn’t delve into it.
With the story, characters and themes, in the words of Tyler Mowery, I am attempting to “flip the premise” and tell something new about psychopaths. I understand that people like you and Athena care very deeply about the subject and I want to ensure that I get it as accurate as possible.
If you are explaining it from Emily's mind, then it is going to be an incorrect view of psychopathy as neurotypicals do not understand psychopaths to begin with. They assume things about us that are incorrect and draw conclusions about us that are based in false assumptions.
Thank you for replying. If I were to incorporate elements such as Sam’s behavior being hard to understand from Emily’s perspective and him constantly pointing out that she’s wrong, I can make that a central theme in the story. I could tie this into what James Fallon said in his book about how there are things about the mind that we’ll not understand for a long time when it comes to psychopathy, but for now how to deal with them and to not leap to the worst conclusion.
I saw in your post how you listed out the traits found in psychopaths and I will include those and ensure that they respond correctly in the situations I put them in. To make sure I get it correct, I’ll be taking inspiration from stories of psychopaths to ensure accuracy.
While I see you said that neurotypical people should leave psychopathy alone, there are still things we can pick up on while at the same time having the theme that there are things we won’t understand and how to deal with it. Combining that with everything we do know at the moment in terms of traits and how I mentioned taking inspiration, I think there’s still something we can explore.
Hi Athena, I finally read Patric Gagne’s book “Sociopath” and have a bunch of thoughts about it, as well as questions for you. First of all, Patric does not fit the definition of sociopathy that you describe. There was absolutely no traumatic abuse in her childhood; her parents were remarkably accepting of her—all things considered. It seems far more likely that she inherited her personality disorder, and that it does not fit neatly into either psychopathy or sociopathy.
So that left me wondering whether psychopathy exists in a pure form (as you describe about yourself) and as varying degrees on a spectrum. There are many people who lack guilt, shame and remorse to varying degrees, but who experienced no abuse or trauma early in life. Nonetheless, they deviate from the “norm” to an extent that qualifies them as neurodivergent.
Neurodivergence is a complicated concept that applies to many different types of deviations other than those that create personality disorders. For instance, having learning disabilities like ADHD and dyslexia make one neurodivergent, as does being on the autism spectrum. Essentially, anyone whose brain is wired in ways that are significantly different from the “norm” fall into the category of neurodivergence.
Before continuing, I’d love to understand how you define neurodivergence…
Thanks! Your essay on borderline psychopathy is exactly the way I’ve been thinking about diversity among psychopaths. But it’s also exactly the way I’ve been thinking about diversity, in general.
What I find so interesting is that despite being neurodivergent in very different ways than you are, and despite seeing the world through a lenses that it very different than yours—we often assess human behavior in similar ways and come to the same conclusions. I’d like to believe that that means are conclusions are based on objective truths rather than subjective ones. 🤷🏻♀️
True Athena you did not say that. My takeaway is very clear from you I appreciate it much: "There is no overlap between psychopathy and sociopathy, and what people usually call a "psychopath" is usually nothing more than a collection of stereotypes that don't apply to anyone." No overlap. Propping the PCL-R ? Are they credited by professional groups of psychiatrists? Sometimes the mad are managing the asylum. e.g. that popular Canadian psychiatrist was "disciplined" by the Canadian College of psychiatrists whatever.
Psychiatrists have no more business defining psychopathy than they do defining autism. It isn't a psychiatric concern, it exists in the realm of neurology.
i'm constantly uncomfortable reading or hearing definitions of psychopath that are different from yours. Please help me understand. From your explanation my summary is: some 10% of psychopaths are sociopaths, and most sociopaths are psychopaths. The conventional definition of psychopath is wrong. This video mentions the Psychopath Checklist to diagnose psychopathy. But if i understood you correctly in that video the correct expression would be to replace every instance of the word psychopathy or psychopath with Sociopathy or sociopath. Is that right? In short, what most ppl call psychopath, really is a sociopath. https://youtu.be/0XhGImXWX30
I am familiar with the video and give it no time. "Wayne" is a criminal. Nothing more or less. I have no idea if he's psychopathic or not, and frankly, it doesn't matter. They are just propping up the PCL-R, which is garbage. I wouldn't attempt to make it make sense because I can't be bothered to sit through the whole thing.
I don't know where you got the idea that ten percent of psychopaths are sociopaths. I have never said that. There is no overlap between psychopathy and sociopathy, and what people usually call a "psychopath" is usually nothing more than a collection of stereotypes that don't apply to anyone.
This statement is not so clear for me: "psychopathy ....usually nothing more than a collection of stereotypes that don't apply to anyone." Not really. There are certain characteristics that might describe what you define as psychopathy. It cant be a free , fuzzy definition.
I tried reading the book "the sociopath next door" in a bookstore once. I can utterly say that it was quite a waste of time. It was nothing like I was expecting
A bunch of Reddit readers were discussing the interview, and I happened upon this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/askpsychology/comments/jqewhk/does_anyone_know_where_the_writer_patric_gagne/
Express-Midnight-696·
6 days ago
Criminal justice researcher/licensed California therapist here. Here is "Patric Gagne's" real personal and professional identify as far as can be gleaned. Her real name is Patricia J Cagle (if anything about her is verifiably real) not Dr. Patricia Gagne. Notably, she did not file a "fictitious business name" in California to operate her clinical practice under a fictitious name. She wrote both her her Modern Love and memoir under a fictitious name and identity. She has conflicting explanations for why her name is "Patric" not Patricia. Clever but deceptive. She told the highly credulous NYT David Marchese that she she shortened her name to appear more "masculine than feminine." Her actual performer website states that she changed her name to prevent her clients from knowing who she really is. Her acting profile states that her false identity is "so far working:""Patric" is also- looking at real information- an Improve theatre performer and claims that she hides her real identity so that her, presumably vulnerable psychotherapy clients, cannot find out anything about her real, private life. Her photos verify the actor and the author are the same woman. She may or may not have graduated from UCLA and received a BA, but records cannot be found. (I have an undergraduate degree from Yale-easily located as are my graduate degrees from University of San Francisco). Her graduate degree, is a PsyD, not a Phd. It was granted from a sketch graduate school in LA. She does appear to have a provider number but not under her name or identity and it may or may not be as a MA counselor or PsyD. It is critical to state that the REAL Dr. Gagne is a much older, eminent Dr. of Sociology with 72 major peer reviewed articles in gender studies and interesting subjects like motorcyclists. I wrote her to alert her. Other than Modern Love, I could not find a single reference to any articles, studies or any-general readership article/study/ essay or any evidence of advocacy. Lies.
Wow, that's really incredible
Poor thing. What a troubled soul.
This is an amazing find to the thread!! I was fully enjoying already but your post really butters the old spinach! hehehe. Thanks!!
She reminds me a bit of Elizabeth Holmes. She seems to be a "fake it till you make it" kind of gal. Those types always land on their feet. They just create a new persona.
When I read things like this I am always struck by the fact that good old Mk I neurotypical human beings can commit almost any atrocity that could be imagined with some prep time and with further planning actually feel good and justified about having done it.
In fact that's what would make a sociopath. You take an individual and place him or her in an environment where bad behavior can be justified in order to cope and you're on the way to making a sociopath.
I don't think that makes a sociopath. That simply tests the normative humans darkness.
On your first paragraph??? Wow. I think "yes"!!! exactly.
Do you mean like Jason Bourne in the series of movies? In the movies, he was trained to commit atrocity on behalf of government.
Burning witches. The Inquisition (all 300 years worth). etc etc etc. Right down to John McCain running with the Maverick for president!! hahaha.
But on a smaller level, in town, a church, a religion. It is all the same isn't it? There are religious groups, today, hoping for a civil war in USA so they can use some of them fancy toy soldier stuff they got. Not like that stuff is cheap. They want to try it out!!
In a family, I think Athena said this earlier: Constant criticism while withholding affection creates strange personalities. Best!
From what I understand about mental illness and neurological conditions, is that symptoms don't suddenly decide to fuck off when it's convenient. Wouldn't that be nice. Hey schizophrenics, did you know, you can choose when to have hallucinations! Hey ADHD people, you have a major project due next week, why don't you put that ADHD to the side and focus! Hey people with anxiety, make sure to time your panic attacks so that you don't accidentally kill someone while driving!
I think this is where people get confused, they display one or two symptoms once in a while, and they think they're mentally ill. If we applied the schizophrenia label to anyone who has ever experienced non-drug induced hallucinations ever, then the vast majority of the population would be schizophrenic.
That is the vibe I get from this article. She's a sociopath, unless it benefits her to not be. Honestly, it's entirely possible that she is a sociopath and that there is key information that we're missing that would confirm it. Based on the article alone however, are not points in her favour.
That would make schizophrenia like an LSD trip.
Agreed, and in my opinion, the distinct lack of control over symptoms is what makes a mental illness a mental illness.
I am curious - where did you find that the majority of people have experienced at least one incidence of non-drug induced hallucinations. I didn't think it was that prevalent.
Honestly, considering the vast amount of reasons someone may hallucinate, sleep deprivation, illness, stress, it would surprise me if the vast majority of people didn’t experience at least one hallucination in their life. Here’s the article. https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/the-asymmetric-brain/202212/new-research-shows-how-common-hallucinations-really-are?amp
Athena: One Peanut Gallery commenter!! hehehe.
She appears full of shit: "insincere". Not in touch with the truth trying to help others.
Not "the" Donald, but certainly, "a" Donald.
Just simply a liar.
I can't seem to write down 'why'. I will try to find someone to ask over beers. It is a very bewildering subject, your past two episodes. Very enjoyable and make my brain race!! TY
I have another couple of articles I would like to do on sociopathy. I have been thinking about this a bit recently, and due to people's perpetual conflation between sociopathy and psychopathy I think I may need to put a bit more into posts that explores the differences.
If you've ever watched interviews with ex-cons it's similar
Without knowledge of her childhood history, it's impossible to determine whether she has a legitimate diagnosis or is merely a poseur. I suspect the latter. Or, maybe she really believes it. If nothing else, she's beyond irritating.
I wonder if she comes across more likeably in video or in person.
That would be interesting to find out. In part, she came off as irritating because the interviewer seemed completely unprepared. Both seemed to have confused notions about what a sociopath actually is. But, since this woman claims to be not only a sociopath but also a mental health professional, I was dismayed by her lack of understanding. Maybe the book will clear things up.
Yes, I agree. I think it is difficult when an interviewer approaches a subject with nerves or excitement already involved.
I gather that she's quite attractive, so that could have affected Marchese's performance interviewing her. Again I'm reminded of Elizabeth Holmes, who didn't strike me as particularly attractive, but men found her to be so to such a degree that they handed over fortunes based on the most dubious claims. These were educated men, too!! Interestingly, women when approached by Holmes saw straight through her.
I know precisely the type
Hi, Athena.
I am an actor and writer and I am currently writing a script on psychopathy. I understand that there has been a lot of misrepresentation in cinema regarding psychopaths and so I would like to ensure that my script is as accurate as possible.
My main question is what exactly would you like to see my script explore when it comes to psychopathy? My initial idea was to have three main characters: the psychopath, the girl (whether that be girlfriend or not I’m not sure) and her father. The psychopath (who is sort of inspired by James Fallon) is building his mask for society and meets the girl and becomes close with her. She represents society and what is the correct thing to believe and the father is a doctor who like Robert Hare misjudges and is very harsh with the psychopath and tries to influence his daughter into accepting his views, convincing her that he is guilty. She has to decide who to free from guilt and who to blame. I’ve titled it “Who to Free and Who to Blame”, inspired by Johnny Cash’s song “The Man Comes Around”.
Let me know what you think and if you have any adjustments (I’m sure there will be), I’ll make them for you. Thank you.
Ellie Smith is correct in directing you to the previous post about this. Neurotypicals need to leave psychopathy alone as most of the myths that surround it come from their own inability to understand it at a fundamental level.
Hey Joseph
Not Athena but she did write a post back in November about this very subject. https://athenawalker.substack.com/p/hey-athena-how-do-i-write-a-psychopathic
Psychopaths are hard to write. Look at your script again and realize that if you do decide to write the script anyways despite Athena's wishes, you're going to have to come up with a reason why the psychopath would care about what the girl thinks of him. The reason cannot be because of love or any other type of emotional reason.
From a general writing perspective, having characters be symbols of entire groups of people runs the risk of creating caricatures of those groups. If psychopaths had a capability to be offended, you would run the risk of creating something highly offensive by doing this. This happens all the time with minority groups in general. As for a character being a symbol for society? Society is HIGHLY complex. How can one make a single character out of it? Whatever character you make will only represent what you think society is, and that will cause backlash depending on who your audience is. My advice? Focus on making your characters people rather than symbols.
That being said, your concept does sound intriguing. Perhaps it can be about how people treat those who are different. Maybe make the story in the point of view of the girl, saving you from having to explain a psychopath's internal mind. If you're making the father based on Robert Hare, maybe don't make the psychopath a real psychopath but rather someone who has the label of psychopath and make it a story about prejudice.
I wish you the best of luck.
Thank you, Ellie. You saved me the effort
Hey, Ellie.
Thank you for sending me that link. I’ll read it now.
Regarding the psychopath’s motivation (I’ve named him Sam for now as part of my first draft), I planned on it being the same as Athena’s when it comes to her blog and Quora answers: to stop misinformation spreading. I’ve read about psychopaths having to work hard to build up their mask and how it can be exhausting to maintain it constantly.
Characters can be both people and symbols, that was what I meant, and you are right that it can be easy to fall into the trap of caricature, which is what I’m concerned about too. I’ll do my best to avoid it. Society is definitely complex, but I was thinking about how the perception of psychopaths in cinema has become quite generalized in the public that perhaps one person representing them would have a degree of accuracy. I could be wrong on that so feel free to correct me if so.
I like the idea you’ve presented about Sam potentially having the label of a psychopath instead, but I want to use this as an opportunity to clear up any misinterpretations of psychopaths installed in the public by cinema. I want to present something new to them.
I also like the idea of it being from the perspective of the girl (who I’ve called Emily) and it would save me the trouble of explaining Sam’s mind, but at the same time I feel like I wouldn’t do justice to the story’s message if I didn’t delve into it.
With the story, characters and themes, in the words of Tyler Mowery, I am attempting to “flip the premise” and tell something new about psychopaths. I understand that people like you and Athena care very deeply about the subject and I want to ensure that I get it as accurate as possible.
If you are explaining it from Emily's mind, then it is going to be an incorrect view of psychopathy as neurotypicals do not understand psychopaths to begin with. They assume things about us that are incorrect and draw conclusions about us that are based in false assumptions.
Hi, Athena.
Thank you for replying. If I were to incorporate elements such as Sam’s behavior being hard to understand from Emily’s perspective and him constantly pointing out that she’s wrong, I can make that a central theme in the story. I could tie this into what James Fallon said in his book about how there are things about the mind that we’ll not understand for a long time when it comes to psychopathy, but for now how to deal with them and to not leap to the worst conclusion.
I saw in your post how you listed out the traits found in psychopaths and I will include those and ensure that they respond correctly in the situations I put them in. To make sure I get it correct, I’ll be taking inspiration from stories of psychopaths to ensure accuracy.
While I see you said that neurotypical people should leave psychopathy alone, there are still things we can pick up on while at the same time having the theme that there are things we won’t understand and how to deal with it. Combining that with everything we do know at the moment in terms of traits and how I mentioned taking inspiration, I think there’s still something we can explore.
Does that sound okay? Thank you.
Hi Athena, I finally read Patric Gagne’s book “Sociopath” and have a bunch of thoughts about it, as well as questions for you. First of all, Patric does not fit the definition of sociopathy that you describe. There was absolutely no traumatic abuse in her childhood; her parents were remarkably accepting of her—all things considered. It seems far more likely that she inherited her personality disorder, and that it does not fit neatly into either psychopathy or sociopathy.
So that left me wondering whether psychopathy exists in a pure form (as you describe about yourself) and as varying degrees on a spectrum. There are many people who lack guilt, shame and remorse to varying degrees, but who experienced no abuse or trauma early in life. Nonetheless, they deviate from the “norm” to an extent that qualifies them as neurodivergent.
Neurodivergence is a complicated concept that applies to many different types of deviations other than those that create personality disorders. For instance, having learning disabilities like ADHD and dyslexia make one neurodivergent, as does being on the autism spectrum. Essentially, anyone whose brain is wired in ways that are significantly different from the “norm” fall into the category of neurodivergence.
Before continuing, I’d love to understand how you define neurodivergence…
I wrote about borderline psychopathy here:
https://athenawalker.substack.com/p/psychopathic-spectrum
Also, I agree with your definition of neurodivergent
Thanks! Your essay on borderline psychopathy is exactly the way I’ve been thinking about diversity among psychopaths. But it’s also exactly the way I’ve been thinking about diversity, in general.
What I find so interesting is that despite being neurodivergent in very different ways than you are, and despite seeing the world through a lenses that it very different than yours—we often assess human behavior in similar ways and come to the same conclusions. I’d like to believe that that means are conclusions are based on objective truths rather than subjective ones. 🤷🏻♀️
That’s the whole article? No delving into what childhood experiences might have formed her?
Nope, nothing of the sort. Seems like a missed opportunity
True Athena you did not say that. My takeaway is very clear from you I appreciate it much: "There is no overlap between psychopathy and sociopathy, and what people usually call a "psychopath" is usually nothing more than a collection of stereotypes that don't apply to anyone." No overlap. Propping the PCL-R ? Are they credited by professional groups of psychiatrists? Sometimes the mad are managing the asylum. e.g. that popular Canadian psychiatrist was "disciplined" by the Canadian College of psychiatrists whatever.
Psychiatrists have no more business defining psychopathy than they do defining autism. It isn't a psychiatric concern, it exists in the realm of neurology.
Dear Athena,
i'm constantly uncomfortable reading or hearing definitions of psychopath that are different from yours. Please help me understand. From your explanation my summary is: some 10% of psychopaths are sociopaths, and most sociopaths are psychopaths. The conventional definition of psychopath is wrong. This video mentions the Psychopath Checklist to diagnose psychopathy. But if i understood you correctly in that video the correct expression would be to replace every instance of the word psychopathy or psychopath with Sociopathy or sociopath. Is that right? In short, what most ppl call psychopath, really is a sociopath. https://youtu.be/0XhGImXWX30
The psychiatrist talks about "psychological structure", not about oxytocin...
If they think the PCL-R is good for anything, they don't have a good understanding of psychopathy.
I am familiar with the video and give it no time. "Wayne" is a criminal. Nothing more or less. I have no idea if he's psychopathic or not, and frankly, it doesn't matter. They are just propping up the PCL-R, which is garbage. I wouldn't attempt to make it make sense because I can't be bothered to sit through the whole thing.
I don't know where you got the idea that ten percent of psychopaths are sociopaths. I have never said that. There is no overlap between psychopathy and sociopathy, and what people usually call a "psychopath" is usually nothing more than a collection of stereotypes that don't apply to anyone.
This statement is not so clear for me: "psychopathy ....usually nothing more than a collection of stereotypes that don't apply to anyone." Not really. There are certain characteristics that might describe what you define as psychopathy. It cant be a free , fuzzy definition.
You edited out the most crucial part of my statement:
"and what people usually call a "psychopath" is usually nothing more than a collection of stereotypes that don't apply to anyone."
I tried reading the book "the sociopath next door" in a bookstore once. I can utterly say that it was quite a waste of time. It was nothing like I was expecting