Psychopaths may be curable?

[bookbah]

Psychopaths may be curable. Interesting article. http://www.biosciencetechnology.com...ings-spur-debate-are-some-psychopaths-curable

 

[TimeAsylums]

The very first sentence:

A new study finds psychopaths do not lack empathy. They just possess the ability to turn it on and off—perhaps making some curable.

Because being able to control it is...wrong? Curable...lol.
So, they'll turn off the ability to turn on-and-off empathy.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

A new study finds psychopaths do not lack empathy. They just possess the ability to turn it on and off—perhaps making some curable.

Their ability to understand it is part of what makes them so dangerous.

So in other words, sociopaths are more advanced because they can control their empathetic urges while most people can't. The authors continue a long history of equating "different" with "disease." Not surprising.

If we can turn capacity into propensity, we could really help them.

I'm sure they want "helped" as much as the Aztecs wanted "helped" by Spanish missionaries.

“...the tragic deficit appears to be the maldevelopment of the paralimbic system (the brain’s emotional area). This more general deficit prevents psychopaths from forming bonds to others, prevents them from loving or caring.

This could be "switched on and off" as well.

At any rate...

Spoiler

Kill it with fire prescriptions!

 

[Hadoblado]

It's wrong in the sense that it is an ability that is potentially dangerous to the rest of society. Ever seen X-Men? It's a destructive super power. Note that psychopaths often attempt suicide but rarely succeed, implying they recognise an issue but have no way of resolving it. I'd still land on the side of leaving them the fuck alone unless they specifically asked for a cure.

The article was a little wishy-washy, as the criticisms down the bottom illustrated, that a psychopaths MNS lights up when modelling another's mind is not entirely unexpected. They are, after all, often master manipulators.

 

[TimeAsylums]

It's wrong in the sense that it is an ability that is potentially dangerous to the rest of society. Ever seen X-Men? It's a destructive super power. Note that psychopaths often attempt suicide but rarely succeed, implying they recognise an issue but have no way of resolving it. I'd still land on the side of leaving them the fuck alone unless they specifically asked for a cure.

The article was a little wishy-washy, as the criticisms down the bottom illustrated, that a psychopaths MNS lights up when modelling another's mind is not entirely unexpected. They are, after all, often master manipulators.

Some people are born taller, some smarter, some stupider, some shorter, some get to control their empathy... speaking of THD's mentioning "different" vs "disease."

Too much testosterone is linked with violence too...should reduce all those criminals (before they become criminals) testosterone as well...

 

[Hadoblado]

I wasn't arguing for the position, I was illustrating the motive behind it.

And yes, if there was an effective means of controlling dangerous levels of testosterone, there would certainly be support for the notion that it should be forced on particular individuals.

I've seen people argue that prison inmates shouldn't be allowed to exercise, as it unleashes a more able criminal on the world upon release.

 

[TimeAsylums]

I wasn't arguing for the position, I was illustrating the motive behind it.

And yes, if there was an effective means of controlling dangerous levels of testosterone, there would certainly be support for the notion that it should be forced on particular individuals.

I know, I was arguing against the illustration of the opposition.

I've seen people argue that prison inmates shouldn't be allowed to exercise, as it unleashes a more able criminal on the world upon release.

haha 3 sq meals, free library, free weights. It is funny, ( I'm not making an argument or point though ) Come out more educated, more able, more contacts... (Free will is clearly dangerous)

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Note that psychopaths often attempt suicide but rarely succeed, implying they recognise an issue but have no way of resolving it.

This interests me because suicide frequently takes place amidst an extreme emotional state. For a sociopath it could be a way to get even if that's the best option under the circumstances, or it could well be a result of an ethical choice along the lines of not believing suicide to be wrong or selfishly choosing not to endure the pain of old age, if indeed old age is expected to be painful.

And then of course attempting suicide is one hell of a means to manipulate others and the intent to commit may never actually be present, but they use their empathetic abilities to make it appear to be the case. This is most likely imho.

 

[Hadoblado]

That's actually a very good point. I probably should have thought about that a little longer.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

That's actually a very good point. I probably should have thought about that a little longer.

Pick an emo, any emo:
[bimgx=100]http://www.b3tards.com/u/b7385d51d3a878f20ba8/emo.gif[/bimgx]

Having said that... is/was the "emo" trend evidence of an expansion of sociopathic traits in the general population? Hmmm...

 

[TimeAsylums]

Pick an emo, any emo:
[bimgx=100]http://www.b3tards.com/u/b7385d51d3a878f20ba8/emo.gif[/bimgx]

Having said that... is/was the "emo" trend evidence of an expansion of sociopathic traits in the general population? Hmmm...

Assuming the emo stereotype refers to 'depressed/over-emotional/hyper-sensitive/suicidal' doesn't seem to directly equate to sociopathic traits.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Assuming the emo stereotype refers to 'depressed/over-emotional/hyper-sensitive/suicidal' doesn't seem to directly equate to sociopathic traits.

To me "emo" encompasses a certain flavor of attention seeking...?

 

[TimeAsylums]

To me "emo" encompasses a certain flavor of attention seeking...?

Good point, maybe clarify the stereotype, or at least present it in your light so we can discuss?

tbh tho unsure about attention seeking, (all of them), certainly some maybe...

 

[ZenRaiden]

According to what I read, Buddha was a psychopath.

 

[Hadoblado]

Erm... Could you elaborate on that?

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Erm... Could you elaborate on that?

Er... Which "you"?

 

[ZenRaiden]

We need to research the adapted psychopaths along with the ones in the jails.
We study psychopathy from jails. Not from normal adapted ones.
So we do not know what is the ratio of psychopaths in our society. Jail vs. Not criminal.

This guy studies brains and scans them also found out that he him self is a sociopath.
Interesting as it is he is not a serial killer, neither did he do anything criminal.
Hes probably no more of danger to people than anyone else.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2V0vOFexY4

 

[Montresor]

Erm... Could you elaborate on that?

Actually, I would appreciate it if you could prove somehow that psychopaths act out suicide attempts more often or whatever exactly you said?

I just think you're misinterpreting something that may have read similarly to: 'suicide threats rarely carried out'.


Anyways, this article does make a distinction that Pe (i.e. extraverted psychopathy) has been "linked with increased risk."

I dunno.

 

[Hadoblado]

According to what I read, Buddha was a psychopath.

This one (with the elaboration).

@Montresor
Yeah forget I said it. It was in one of my class discussions, which makes it 1 2 3 4th hand information for you at least, it was not well thought out, and based on quite possibly faulty info on top of faulty reasoning.

 

[ZenRaiden]

This one (with the elaboration).

@Montresor
Yeah forget I said it. It was in one of my class discussions, which makes it 1 2 3 4th hand information for you at least, it was not well thought out, and based on quite possibly faulty info on top of faulty reasoning.

It is just a joke. Apparently he was the wisest and most beautiful man to live on planet earth and claims the most quotes. He is a mythical being at best.
I always picture him as an ugly and badass psychopath urging his script writters to write nice stories about him threatning to kill anyone doing otherwise. To put it simply - he was master of propaganda. I really have no reason to believe anything that is written about him. We can hardly make up the biography of Adolf Hitler, not to mention a biography of a guy who died 1000s of years ago.

 

[TimeAsylums]

So, I was thinking, the only ones safe from psychopaths...are other psychopaths. Natural predators would be other psychopaths ahahah turn off empathy to the turning off/on of another's controlling empathy...Dexter

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

So, I was thinking, the only ones safe from psychopaths...are other psychopaths. Natural predators would be other psychopaths ahahah turn off empathy to the turning off/on of another's controlling empathy...Dexter

http://www.intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=16803

 

[Wolf18]

Why would a psychopath want to be "cured"? Why not just cure Everyone Else?

SW

 

[Architect]

Isn't that like curing a Soprano of her voice? ht The Left Hand of Darkness

 

[cheese]

The empathy-compassion distinction mentioned at the end is one that's unfortunately often ignored. Being able to read others is what makes psychopath criminals so good at what they do. That part of 'empathy' they don't lack; it's not autism.

Compassion seems a different issue though. I suspect it can be developed somewhat if the individual retains some ability to bond. Universal compassion seems to be just an extension of that basic bonding mechanism (bond - mirrored hurt in self when other is hurt - internalised principle to protect other from hurt - instinct to protect, including from self). Through experience and some mental exercise (especially abstracting the bond and protector instinct from linear time/direct experience), that compassion is seen to be applicable to everyone. Thus, morality.


Can they turn compassion on and off? Is compassion just extreme mirror activity? Obviously they have enough theory-of-mind and mirror activity to read others when they choose. Might stronger activity result in the same feeling being produced as what is seen?


Hey, it's Bookbah's very first post.

 

[TheScornedReflex]

The empathy-compassion distinction mentioned at the end is one that's unfortunately often ignored. Being able to read others is what makes psychopath criminals so good at what they do. That part of 'empathy' they don't lack; it's not autism.

Compassion seems a different issue though. I suspect it can be developed somewhat if the individual retains some ability to bond. Universal compassion seems to be just an extension of that basic bonding mechanism (bond - mirrored hurt in self when other is hurt - internalised principle to protect other from hurt - instinct to protect, including from self). Through experience and some mental exercise (especially abstracting the bond and protector instinct from linear time/direct experience), that compassion is seen to be applicable to everyone. Thus, morality.


Can they turn compassion on and off? Is compassion just extreme mirror activity? Obviously they have enough theory-of-mind and mirror activity to read others when they choose. Might stronger activity result in the same feeling being produced as what is seen?


Hey, it's Bookbah's very first post.

This is why I married you.

 

[ZenRaiden]

With what we know about psychopaths, there is relatively little to no evidence to say what a psychopath does in his head or why they do what they do. In general there are traits that all can add up in to a psychopathic person, yet as it was allready said psychopaths have problem with social norms. Same way I see that some normal people have trouble with social norms. I think that autistic people have trouble with social norms too and treat them as a absolute and then become obsessive about how they do not understand the world. I think it is the social norms we have today that pull us away from our nature in favor of civilization, yet humans need more space to be individualities. Individuum is a continuum of qualities where the individual acts on his own selfish needs and obtains what ever he needs for satisfying the basic and other needs what ever they might be. However society is constricted by too many rules that simply create a tight-ass system where doing anything gets you in to trouble. Schools basically take up your young life and all we do there is sit and listen to some senile person talking about how to behave.

Sure we need to be civil, but not step on our own freedom as we do it. I absolutly believe that the next stage of developement of people is that of tearing this society apart and building a new one that is more free and gives more choices to people, based on their nature and provides humans with space where the individuality is valued not dishonored.

One thing that psychopaths and autistic people have in common for example is that neither understand society. Psychopaths try to understand society, but they fail to. They only aknowledge that it works and they can exploit as they "understand it", but with the same breath add they really do not know why people do what they do. Autistic people have trouble too. They are basically free of social norms and regulations which gives them freedom to explore their own individuality. Of course all these individual traits that do not comply with the system are seen as eccentricities. So a good example is to remember that allready today our society would be viewed as extreme and eccentric compared to older societies. We just need to find a way to build a society that allows for freedom and individuality to grow naturally and unrestricted all while our society is structured and civil, providing all that we need.

 

[Hadoblado]

I think that sort of change can only really come about at the individual level. There are ways of controlling things at that level (religion for example), but to unify a society freely and without force or doctrine? I think that requires more than what humans are capable of.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I think that sort of change can only really come about at the individual level. There are ways of controlling things at that level (religion for example), but to unify a society freely and without force or doctrine? I think that requires more than what humans are capable of.

I tend to think of culture as a body such as a cell. A cell has a system of channels to absorb and to expel objects from its body. The same way culture has a habit of expelling and absorbing things as it goes. We just need a central philosophy that gives people the means to relate to more advance concepts which in reality are hard to grasp, because simplicity usually wins over complexity, especially with simple people. Then again reading and writing used to be an ability that people rarely had in the past. Now days literacy rates in many countries is close to 100 percent.
And lets face it. If reading was so practical that now anyone knows how to read it is easy to imagine that individuality will, become part of social necessity as means to function as a member of a group that holds these values essential to be part of a working system. The world is changing rapidly and I think that, most a great majority, are still living in the past. It is not just iphones, cars, internet, medicine etc. that makes our present so different. It is also the psychological factor of expectations and the need to convince the people who are still unable to see that the world offers so much more when people are operating on an individual level. It is that today we expect far more given the circumstances we have and adding them is much different than for example what our fathers and mothers had at disposal.

Not sure if it makes any sense, but questioning the objectivity of the system today is better than anytime in the past. I am in for a silent revolution of thought.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

I tend to think of culture as a body such as a cell.

So you're calling me a lysosome...

Spoiler

I'm okay with that.

 

[Duxwing]

With what we know about psychopaths, there is relatively little to no evidence to say what a psychopath does in his head or why they do what they do. In general there are traits that all can add up in to a psychopathic person, yet as it was allready said psychopaths have problem with social norms. Same way I see that some normal people have trouble with social norms. I think that autistic people have trouble with social norms too and treat them as a absolute and then become obsessive about how they do not understand the world. I think it is the social norms we have today that pull us away from our nature in favor of civilization, yet humans need more space to be individualities. Individuum is a continuum of qualities where the individual acts on his own selfish needs and obtains what ever he needs for satisfying the basic and other needs what ever they might be. However society is constricted by too many rules that simply create a tight-ass system where doing anything gets you in to trouble. Schools basically take up your young life and all we do there is sit and listen to some senile person talking about how to behave.

Sure we need to be civil, but not step on our own freedom as we do it. I absolutly believe that the next stage of developement of people is that of tearing this society apart and building a new one that is more free and gives more choices to people, based on their nature and provides humans with space where the individuality is valued not dishonored.

One thing that psychopaths and autistic people have in common for example is that neither understand society. Psychopaths try to understand society, but they fail to. They only aknowledge that it works and they can exploit as they "understand it", but with the same breath add they really do not know why people do what they do. Autistic people have trouble too. They are basically free of social norms and regulations which gives them freedom to explore their own individuality. Of course all these individual traits that do not comply with the system are seen as eccentricities. So a good example is to remember that allready today our society would be viewed as extreme and eccentric compared to older societies. We just need to find a way to build a society that allows for freedom and individuality to grow naturally and unrestricted all while our society is structured and civil, providing all that we need.

Erm, well, no duh we want those things, but what are the specific problems that you've found, and what are the trade-offs between the extremes that you've proposed, for example, that between civility and individuality?

-Duxwing

 

[ZenRaiden]

Erm, well, no duh we want those things, but what are the specific problems that you've found, and what are the trade-offs between the extremes that you've proposed, for example, that between civility and individuality?

-Duxwing

People confuse civility with restrictions. Restricting peoples freedom is against what is called individuality. The idea is that everyone has potential to be a unique member of society. Instead of pushing people in one social bag and force people to act in contorted way people should remember that unique ideas come from unique people and their unique way of dealing with problems.

Civility is acting in favour of options that yield best results for everyone and give people the ability to be productive while not be destructive to the system which we live in.

The problem is that civility should always go hand in hand with freedom. Its that makes all the difference. However freedom to do what ever want does not exist. We already have created what freedom is, but it is built by compromises.
And compromises are the true heading as to build most freespirited and yet well balanced society.

 

[Cognisant]

Aren't we all psychopaths?

As a test if I inserted a gold rod into my arm, allowed the wound to heal, then gave you a scalpel and told you that of you cut it out you get to keep it and if you don't cut it out I'm going to cut it out and keep it myself anyway, could you cut me open? It would hurt me obviously, and by empathy to some extent it will be making you uncomfortable as well, but I think we all have the capacity to put that feeling aside and get on with it, being psychopathic isn't nessecarily a bad thing.

Paramedics and surgeons are trained to be psychopaths.

The problem is people who are psychopathic, ruthlessly self interested and unconcerned with social/legal consequences, or in other words stupid, we're all capable of murdering others out of self interest but for the vast majority of us it's simply not worth it, the social/legal risk is too much of a risk, getting away with such a crime is too much of a hassle when one's interests could be better served in safer/easier ways.

 

[Duxwing]

Aren't we all psychopaths?

As a test if I inserted a gold rod into my arm, allowed the wound to heal, then gave you a scalpel and told you that of you cut it out you get to keep it and if you don't cut it out I'm going to cut it out and keep it myself anyway, could you cut me open? It would hurt me obviously, and by empathy to some extent it will be making you uncomfortable as well, but I think we all have the capacity to put that feeling aside and get on with it, being psychopathic isn't nessecarily a bad thing.

Paramedics and surgeons are trained to be psychopaths.

The problem is people who are psychopathic, ruthlessly self interested and unconcerned with social/legal consequences, or in other words stupid, we're all capable of murdering others out of self interest but for the vast majority of us it's simply not worth it, the social/legal risk is too much of a risk, getting away with such a crime is too much of a hassle when one's interests could be better served in safer/easier ways.

Sociopaths never experience the social forces that your hypothetical surgeon would have to will himself to ignore. We are all capable of great evil, but we must be changed into other people before so doing.

-Duxwing

 

[crippli]

Aren't we all psychopaths?

I don't think so.

Definiton from wikipedia;
Psychopathy (/saɪˈkɒpəθi/) (or sociopathy (/ˈsoʊsiəˌpæθi/)) is a personality trait or disorder characterised partly by enduring anti-social behavior, a diminished capacity for empathy or remorse, and poor behavioral controls.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy#cite_note-gap-1I don't think that last point affects everyone. Most people have good behaviour control. So that important part is not to have the one who control them to be a psychopath.

As a test if I inserted a gold rod into my arm, allowed the wound to heal, then gave you a scalpel and told you that of you cut it out you get to keep it and if you don't cut it out I'm going to cut it out and keep it myself anyway, could you cut me open?

I would not do it. I don't cut anything open unless I intend to eat it. Wrecking havoc on natures creatures and stuff just for gold, isn't to my taste.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Aren't we all psychopaths?

As a test if I inserted a gold rod into my arm, allowed the wound to heal, then gave you a scalpel and told you that of you cut it out you get to keep it and if you don't cut it out I'm going to cut it out and keep it myself anyway, could you cut me open? It would hurt me obviously, and by empathy to some extent it will be making you uncomfortable as well, but I think we all have the capacity to put that feeling aside and get on with it, being psychopathic isn't nessecarily a bad thing.

Paramedics and surgeons are trained to be psychopaths.

No, we're not. For starters, your permission isn't necessary for you to be sliced open.

And who's to say they aren't already? Surgeons especially.

The problem is people who are psychopathic, ruthlessly self interested and unconcerned with social/legal consequences, or in other words stupid, we're all capable of murdering others out of self interest but for the vast majority of us it's simply not worth it, the social/legal risk is too much of a risk, getting away with such a crime is too much of a hassle when one's interests could be better served in safer/easier ways.

At its most basic form a sociopath is one who holds a philosophy that rejects ethics as nothing more than social constructs and acts on that philosophy. Socially unacceptable solutions to problems aren't preferred, merely considered equally.

In the world exist sheep, wolves, and shepherds. Sheep and wolves are equally stupid, and shepherds eat for free.

Definiton from wikipedia;
Psychopathy (/saɪˈkɒpəθi/) (or sociopathy (/ˈsoʊsiəˌpæθi/)) is a personality trait or disorder characterised partly by enduring anti-social behavior, a diminished capacity for empathy or remorse, and poor behavioral controls.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy#cite_note-gap-1

Speaking of wolves, ^here's the perfect definition. Behavioral control differentiates the wolf from the shepherd.

 

[Montresor]

Wolves cull themselves man, is mankind not more predacious yet?

Part of poor behavioral control is innate and part is learned ... psychopathic people tend to learn to avoid getting caught/punished through non-conventional means ... they lack the connectivity to properly associate cause and effect, I believe the faulty amygdala is partly to blame.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Wolves cull themselves man, is mankind not more predacious yet?

Part of poor behavioral control is innate and part is learned ... psychopathic people tend to learn to avoid getting caught/punished through non-conventional means ... they lack the connectivity to properly associate cause and effect, I believe the faulty amygdala is partly to blame.

To be specific, shepherds cull their naked brethren. It increases the sheep's trust on their way to slaughter.

The cause and effect thing is pretty well bullshit though. The amygdala is emotional processing, which sociopaths actually have the full capacity to use, but also an additional "switch" that allows them to activate emotion at will; I suspect through selective dissociation.

 

[Montresor]

The cause and effect thing is pretty well bullshit though. The amygdala is emotional processing, which sociopaths actually have the full capacity to use, but also an additional "switch" that allows them to activate emotion at will; I suspect through selective dissociation.

Whatever you say....

I will maintain that a major contributing factor to impulse control in psychopaths is caused, at least in part, by a faulty association made between behavior > consequences > emotive impact of consequences.

Faulty in that the learning that occurs is not typical of normal people.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Whatever you say....

I will maintain that a major contributing factor to impulse control in psychopaths is caused, at least in part, by a faulty association made between behavior > consequences > emotive impact of consequences.

Faulty in that the learning that occurs is not typical of normal people.

Faulty or correct? Meaning the normal response is faulty...

 

[Montresor]

A man sees a woman who is upset,

She must be upset because her husband is gone and she has to get a job and protect herself now.

She should be happy because she can have more lovers and more freedom. She might also have been paid a death benefit. The woman is lucky!

Her husband made her upset, the kidnapping/ brutal murder is irrelevant.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Why kidnap and kill? Take hubby's place, and hit it while you drain the bank account. Kidnap and kill comes into play when/if they become a threat.

 

[Montresor]

Faulty or correct? Meaning the normal response is faulty...

Response is only one part of learning. Stimulus + outcome make 3.

'Faulty' response, (i.e. fear) characteristic of being human, can still lead to valid learning.

The 'correct response', as you indicate, is therefore the one that overrides the fear response (call it psychopathic),

which I would argue is a fault in the natural learning cycle that all animals must experience correctly in order to optimize reproductive success.

What's more, it's not hard to foresee that incidences of psychopathy must surely be strongly correlated to premature deaths both of the individual and their offspring/ancestors.

I'll add that the amygdala is the structure mostly associated with the fear response and learning that comes with it. I would contend that it is the most primitive form of learning (more primitive than Pavlovian conditioning, or basic habituation, even)

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

which I would argue is a fault in the natural learning cycle that all animals must experience correctly in order to optimize reproductive success.

What's more, it's not hard to foresee that incidences of psychopathy must surely be strongly correlated to premature deaths both of the individual and their offspring/ancestors.

What I don't get is how you connect it to poor reproductive success. Mirroring should be sufficient to form relationships and reproduce. People are machines that follow rules and can hence be manipulated. There are other selective forces at work, which is explored ~post 87 and later. If anything I'd say it increases reproductive success, otherwise Hardy-Weinberg would have us dead.

 

[Montresor]

What I don't get is how you connect it to poor reproductive success. Mirroring should be sufficient to form relationships and reproduce. People are machines that follow rules and can hence be manipulated. There are other selective forces at work, which is explored ~post 87 and later. If anything I'd say it increases reproductive success, otherwise Hardy-Weinberg would have us dead.

Fear conditioning is essential to the reproductive fitness of the human species.

Psychopaths are probably more fit as individuals as you say, but with regards to the fitness of a population, they are not. The trait does not directly promote propagation in the entire population of psychopaths, a latent benefit is higher incidene of rape and manipulation; short term perks in a downward spiral to extinction, the costs outweigh the benefits.

I read those posts you linked, I basically agree with Jason43 on most all counts.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Fear conditioning is essential to the reproductive fitness of the human species.

Was the first man who charged a lion off its kill with a spear not psychotic?

Psychopaths are probably more fit as individuals as you say, but with regards to the fitness of a population, they are not. The trait does not directly promote propagation in the entire population of psychopaths, a latent benefit is higher incidene of rape and manipulation; short term perks in a downward spiral to extinction, the costs outweigh the benefits.

Simply put, Hardy-Weinberg disagrees. Are you sure you're viewing sociopathy holistically?

Now, a population decline as the result of an overpopulation? Sure. But extinction? Hell naw. The prevalence of sociopathy in the population fluctuates like that of lynx and hares or the wolves and moose of Isle Royale.

Spoiler

[bimgx=400]http://www.cliodynamics.info/auxiliary/infograph.jpg[/bimgx]

Where else does sociopathy manifest, other than the power bastions of politics? What more reasonable proxy is there?

 

[Montresor]

Was the first man who charged a lion off its kill with a spear not psychotic?

Simply put, Hardy-Weinberg disagrees. Are you sure you're viewing sociopathy holistically?

Now, a population decline as the result of an overpopulation? Sure. But extinction? Hell naw. The prevalence of sociopathy in the population fluctuates like that of lynx and hares or the wolves and moose of Isle Royale.

Where else does sociopathy manifest, other than the power bastions of politics? What more reasonable proxy is there?

Fancy words^^ in need of deciphering.

Was the first man who charged a lion off its kill with a spear not psychotic?

I see this as a Red herring argument. First of, psychosis is not necessarily characteristic of psychopathy. Second, perhaps he was not psychotic, I never met the guy? Third, I am trying to say that psychopathy is characterized by major issues with impulse control, not simply the ability to override the fear response, but more: a preference for it; a natural inclination.

The thing about humans is they all have the ability (to an extent) to rationalize and suppress the fear response, that is, until the danger is extremely imminent. I wouldn't necessarily consider a wild lion to be imminent danger, with the appropriate amount of weaponry, planning, timing, methodology, and teamwork.

But you are not talking about a hunt, you are talking about one insane individual who chases a lion off its kill.... so ... to avoid making a R.H. of my own, then I must answer yes, he must have been psychotic.

Therefore, I do believe that there are instances where atypical fear conditioning and impulse control can be advantageous, same goes with general boldness, callousness and the like. Advantageous for the individual, mind you, but not necessarily a population. I imagine that an entire population of psychopathic humans would naturally select for traits that tend towards empathy and community.

Simply put, Hardy-Weinberg disagrees. Are you sure you're viewing sociopathy holistically?

Simply put, I feel this argument is invalid. Reading up on H-W I see that the major caveat to the heuristic is that it requires the absence of "other evolutionary influences" such as non-random mating, and natural selection.

I mostly think that I view psychopathy holistically, however, I also think that a majority of the typical traits all have some sort of 'common relation' to each other, something just creepy and inhuman (as most like to put it) ... and my argument is that this connection, specifically, has to do with the inherent fault in the fear conditioning system (which is Pavlovian btw, so overrides what I mentioned earlier on about primacy).

It all stems from this basic error in their wiring. The next step, is the inability to recognize fear in others ... which generalizes further towards traits of shallow affect/lack of empathy ... et cetera.

Now, a population decline as the result of an overpopulation? Sure. But extinction? Hell naw. The prevalence of sociopathy in the population fluctuates like that of lynx and hares or the wolves and moose of Isle Royale.

You got me there. Extinction was wrong. I guess I was arguing that psychopathic traits are generally maladaptive and therefore would tend to extinction rather than propagation ... but I would not deny you are an expert in this field.

Where else does sociopathy manifest, other than the power bastions of politics? What more reasonable proxy is there?

...advantageous for the individual in certain circumstances only. Competition among psychopaths changes the rules of the game.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Not all psychopaths are the same and they should all be considered individuals with individual personalities. Psychopathy is either something that is considered wrong and therefore everyone who fits the psychopath checklist is a psychopath then generalizations can be made however I doupt that all people who have the psychopathic brain are evil people commiting crimes. It would be just a sorry attempt to make a general statement to clear the confusion perhaps, but would be a statement ignoring the possibility that some maybe be adapted citizens who function well.

As for psychopath lacking the ability to learn one must understand that it is not learning skills that are missing, but rather a type of personality that a psychopath developes.
It is psychopath predisposition to not react to social stimuli the same way probably, because some neural path wireing is missing nontheless the case is that it is something that makes a psychopath predisposed to act in certain way, not necessarily a rule that a psychopath will always react to social situations wrong way. Psychopaths have even high IQs and still respond irresponsibly from normal persons point of view, nontheless this is not telling us why the psychopath is doing this or that. Its only an attempt of people to make assumptions and predictions and trying to understand why or why not the psychopathic person acts in such a way. Discovering the hidden motives of psychopath is the real goal of psychology and psychiatry so they can be helped to addapt and live a more decent life and not end up in jail. However even if there are common trajectories between psychopaths not all of them really will end up braking the law or killing people or disregarding other peoples feelings. After all psychopaths are able to lear to function and adapt. It is not true that they are not able to do it. However they might have trouble adapting.

The real issue is that while scientist can make some generalizations they still can not understand motives of psychopaths or motives of normal people. Many people think that in general we can predict actions of people however a psychopath is able to understand that he or she is different and may attempt to adjust ones life style to that which yields best results and it is not uncommon for psychopaths to have really well payed jobs and be very professional in their life.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Fancy words^^ in need of deciphering.

I see this as a Red herring argument. First of, psychosis is not necessarily characteristic of psychopathy.

Word salad. Lo siento.

Spoiler

There's a reason it takes me 10 years to type out a response...

Third, I am trying to say that psychopathy is characterized by major issues with impulse control, not simply the ability to override the fear response, but more: a preference for it; a natural inclination.

Yes. As soon as he discovers the ease of his first success, he prefers to make a habit of it, and asks himself what else he's able to do that the sheep aren't. The type of conditioning you're talking about need not occur in early life. PTSD operates on the HPA axis as well, to produce a constant fear response. I'm proposing PTSD's opposite.

Advantageous for the individual, mind you, but not necessarily a population. I imagine that an entire population of psychopathic humans would naturally select for traits that tend towards empathy and community.

Populations are composed of individuals. An entire population of psychopaths depletes their own prey too quickly for their own good. Hardy-Weinberg basically states that a minimum proportion of these individuals will persist in the population indefinitely. This minimum proportion is observed in bottom line population size in predator/prey interactions. Sociopathy is only maladaptive on the population downtrend.

I guess I was arguing that psychopathic traits are generally maladaptive and therefore would tend to extinction rather than propagation ... but I would not deny you are an expert in this field.

Hold your horses, it's all connected. Use this as a foundation and work backwards through Hardy-Weinberg.

Hardy-Weinberg and Lotka-Volterra (predator/prey) only make for this unique union in explanation here because sociopaths prey on their own species. So sociopathic traits in the population.... Actually, I want to build a model of this, as it means that sociopathic traits in the population would persist above Hardy-Weinberg minimums and would become dominant if not for prevailing social norms that currently select hardline against "lower" traits; those that result in incarceration instead of heading corporations. I'm going to propose a basic differentiation of two types of sociopaths; two populations: Typhoid Marys and Switch Hitters. The former is classic (Scarface), the latter is a teambuilder (Robin Hood).

Sociopaths possess the unique evolutionary qualities of both a human and a parasite/virus...

Simply put, I feel

Spoiler

 

[BigApplePi]

Are psychopaths curable? Don't know. My keeper has warned me to be patient. Modern medicine can work miracles and I may get lucky if I can wait it out.