duplication?: The Sociopath

For the most part, this trope seems to be the same as Complete Monster. The trope also has a lot of overlap with Lack of Empathy and Manipulative Bastard. Probably a few of these should be axed or merged. A description of psychopathy/sociopathy probably belongs under Useful Notes.

ETA: It's clear that these are different tropes. Now we are just discussing the article.

edited 7th Aug '11 3:53:19 PM by reub2000

Hmmmm. We could try to make this an objective version of Complete Monster, namely that the character can be viewed as having specific traits that we can identify. Not sure if the effort is enough though.

Somehow I don't think this would be worth the effort.

edited 21st Jul '11 2:07:41 PM by joeyjojojuniorshabadoo

The Sociopath really isn't the same as a Complete Monster. Many Complete Monsters are sociopaths or display sociopathic behavior, but that's hardly the same as saying they're duplicate tropes. What this really seems to overlap with is Lack of Empathy.

It definitely sounds like that. I mean, isn't the defining characteristic of a sociopath, a total Lack of Empathy?

Why not just make The Sociopath a redirect to Lack of Empathy?

We could. I don't mind, unless someone comes up with a good reason to differentiate a characteristic from a character defined by said characteristic.

Well to make yourself a Complete Monster, you pretty much have to be a sociopath. Any hint of remorse and you no longer fit the trope. But as it stands I guess the reverse isn't true.

Further evidence that Lack of Empathy and The Sociopath being the same thing come from entries like this one under Lack of Empathy: "In an episode of 30 Rock, the cast became concerned that Jenna might be a sociopath, but at the end she expresses remorse and it's concluded that she's "only" an "extreme narcissist." "

Complete Monster doesn't require any depth or realism, merely a character who for whatever reason do horrible things.

The Sociopath is a character type, Lack of Empathy is a character trait. A character who lacks empathy is not nessecarily a sociopath - the character might be unempathic on a non-pathological level, or be pathological in another way than sociopathy. Alternatively, he might lack coherent characterization.

Likewise, a character can display enough other sociopathic traits to qualify fot The Sociopath without qualufying for the lack of empathy trope.

I'd actually take your 30 Rock example as evidence that the two are distinct, not the same. Jenna had Lack of Empathy, but wasn't The Sociopath.

I think Xzenu has nailed it. All three tropes are distinct, but can overlap. Lack of Empathy is a trait, not a character type, and may even come and go in an ongoing series. Some shows even seem to have a Lack Of Empathy Ball that gets passed around like the Idiot Ball. (I suppose one could have a Sociopath Ball too, but I don't think I've ever seen that, unless South Park counts.)

Hm. Okay then.

To be a Complete Monster requires some depth. Depth of the character helps us to understand that the character has no altruistic motivations, EVER. That said, real life sociopaths have very little depth or motivation for what they do, kind of like the joker burning the money he got from the mobsters. If you wrote out their life story it would be repetitive with many instances of petty thefts, drunkenness, and lying with very little explanation. They just do these things. So I guess depth in this case means knowing their life story to see if their current behavior is indicative of a larger pattern.

The main point of a sociopath is someone who doesn't have a conscience, and usually completely ignores morals and ethics. A complete monster isn't always a sociopath either. He could be a psychopath, or even just a normal person who justifies his horrific actions. That being said, there is a difference between a psychopath and a sociopath. That difference is compulsion. Let's say that a sociopath and a psychopath are presented with a chance to commit the same horrible action. Whereas the sociopath could easily say no, even though he still can say yes, the psychopath will say yes. Sociopaths are generally intelligent, cunning people with no morals, whereas psychopaths are complete monsters. This also extends to the fact that sociopaths will draw a line, but psychopaths won't.

This is what I found from the preface of The Mask of Sanity: "Since the first edition of this book, revisions of the nomenclature have been made by the American Psychiatric Association. The classification of psychopathic personality was changed to that of sociopathic personality in 1958. In 1968 it was changed again to antisocial personality. Like most psychiatrists I continue to think of the people who are the subject of this book as psychopaths and will most often refer to them by this familiar term. Sociopath or antisocial personality will sometimes appear, used as a synonym to designate patients with this specific pattern of disorder."

AFAIK, the terms are synonymous. I think whoever created the YKTTW preferred the term sociopath. If you'd like to point me to something describes the difference psychopaths and sociopaths, I'd be happy to read it.

Anyways, if they have adequate justifications for their actions, then they aren't a complete monster. They'd be excluded by criteria #3. If they're justification for their actions is that they're victims are weak or gullible, then they are by definition a psychopath.

edited 29th Jul '11 2:12:50 PM by reub2000

The difference between a psychopath and a sociopath is nature vs. nurture. Psychopaths are people who are the way they are because of biological factors that make them unable to feel any empathy or remorse, and as such, they have no problem violating the rights of others for their own... well for any reason, really. Sociopaths are the way they are because of environmental factors, like abuse and neglect; they are conditioned to lose empathy for others, and, like psychopaths, have no problem violating the rights of others they consider outside their group. Because their condition is sociological, not biological, sociopaths are capable of feeling attachment to others that they take a liking to, and as such, may feel some remorse for harming them. They will not extend this courtesy to people they aren't attached to, and will remorselessly violate their rights, just as a psychopath would. However, they are capable of feeling empathy, they just choose not to. Psychopaths, on the other hand, are unable to emotionally differentiate between, say, a close family member and a stranger; they may do the same sort of things to their closest relatives as they would to a random stranger. Psychopaths literally cannot act differently from the way they do; it's a biological problem; sociopaths can, they just choose not to. Psychopaths, when they commit crimes, tend to plan out every detail, and because of their lack of empathy, they are able to do horrendous things in a meticulous, detached manner. They can also get away with crimes much more easily than a sociopath because of this, since they have likely come from ordinary backgrounds, not the type of abuse and neglect necessary to create a sociopath, so they are better able to present a mask of normalcy. A sociopath, on the other hand, is much more likely to act impulsively and show emotion when committing a crime; you would likely see rage or nervousness on their faces as they committed a crime. They also find it much harder to pass in society, since their experiences have made it difficult for them to develop good social skills and thus present that same mask that a psychopath can. They tend to do things which send up warning flags in people's heads, while psychopaths generally act like everyone else. An example of a psychopath done very well is Johan Liebert; a defining mark of his crimes is that there is no emotion in them, a fact which is repeated often throughout the series, and nothing he does, outside his crimes, that is, would make you think anything was wrong; just the opposite, in fact. A sociopath, on the other hand, would be more like Norman Bates, (from the novel, not the movie) or his inspiration, Ed Gein: deeply disturbed, heavily abused, and acting in a way which would tip off ordinary people that something wasn't quite right. A bit off topic I admit, just thought I'd bring in my two cents on the matter. For more information, follow this link: http://helpingpsychology.com/sociopath-vs-psychopath-whats-the-difference

edited 29th Jul '11 6:43:43 PM by tropetown

That is not off topic at all. The first step is to define the trope.

I don't think psychopath's are very good at getting away with crimes. The case study of Milt from The Mask of Sanity comes to mind. Particularly the episode where he picks up the friend with a stolen car.

I guess if some people feel that sociopathy is distinct from psychopathy, then maybe it's worth putting back in there.

edited 29th Jul '11 11:06:34 PM by reub2000

Yes and no. Psychopaths, compared to regular criminals, are not very good at getting away with crimes because they aren't able to anticipate consequences, and their motives for committing them are often unclear and based on poor impulse control. They can plan out the details of their crimes very well, but the reason behind everything is usually quite flimsy and based really on random whimsy. In Milt's case, the reason he got caught with the car is because he wasn't thinking about what would happen if he got caught; a regular criminal would have ditched the car somewhere if he was going to steal it, not simply waited for it to run out of gas. They also wouldn't have called their parents demanding that they pick them up while with said car, knowing that they might possibly bring the police with them. However, compared to sociopaths, yes, they are better able to pass through society without alerting anyone that something is wrong, and as a result, are much better at committing crimes and getting away without suspicion.

A real description of psychopathy/sociopathy would definitely belong in Useful Notes, although Antisocial Personality Disorder is already dealt with in the page on personality disorders. APD is more of an umbrella term, though; psychopathy and sociopathy are specific types of APD which should get their own description.

Oh, I thought of a difference. A sociopath isn't required for complete monster, since it's possible to actively enjoy the suffering of random strangers, where as a sociopath will just not care.

As I see it, there are sociopaths who are complete monsters and there are complete monsters who are sociopaths, but that doesn't make them the same trope.

Yeah, I think that's the conclusion that we came to. Are there any examples under Complete Monster that wouldn't count as a sociopath?

Anyways, I think tropetown knows what he is talking about. Can you start adding what you know to the article. I think after that, we should start weeding through the examples to make sure they are actually sociopaths.

There are probably a few examples of non-sociopathic Complete Monsters, though I can't exactly think of any specific examples. It takes more than a Lack of Empathy and a penchant for doing bad things to make a character a psycho/sociopath; there is a specific list of criteria one must meet before being classified as such. Emotionless detachment from one's crimes (in the case of the psychopath), as well as impulsiveness, self-destructive actions taken for unclear reasons, and various other traits are necessary first. Just because a character crosses the Moral Event Horizon and does not feel remorse doesn't make them a psychopath.

The trope description seems fine, though I will edit the part about sociopathy and APD being the same thing, as well as add a bit about the difference between psychopaths and sociopaths. Should I go into detail about psychopaths, or are we just going to make the page about sociopathy alone?

edited 30th Jul '11 4:13:15 PM by tropetown

I'm aware of the ASPD and PCL-R criteria. I just don't think that examples from fictional works should necessarily need to fulfill those criteria. I don't think strict adherance to the ADHD criteria are requirement for Attention Deficit... Ooh, Shiny!. I mean, did Homer display symptoms before the age of 7 as required by the DSM? Unless the writer(s) is reading a lot of psychology literature, I don't think a character is going to show a realistic depiction of a psychological disorder.

I think the article is getting a bit longish as it is, so I'm not sure what should be added.

The article does seem a bit long. Maybe a useful notes or analysis section? As for a non-sociopathic complete monster, how about The Joker from Batman? I mean, don't his actions display a clear lack of understanding of consequences? He's also incredibly impulsive. But yes, it would be hard to nail down a character as a dedicated psychopath or sociopath, thanks in part to people's misunderstanding of modern psychology.

I'm not familiar with the batman comics, but from I saw in the film, he very definitely seemed to be a socipath, lying about the origin of his scars, going after batman even though he really had no grudge, and terrorizing gotham so he could feed his own ego by giving gotham the kind of criminal it deserves. The comment about a dog chasing a car perfectly illustrates inadequately motivated antisocial behavior.

I'm thinking that character like eric cartman could be considered a sociopath but not a complete monster. He's saved the kittens of south park, even stopped a nuke from blowing up in Clinton's nether regions.

Okay, where you trying to imply that the joker is a psychopath and not a sociopath? The etiology in this case is impossible to determine, as he just shows up in Gotham. He seems to go along more with the outcast story of a sociopath though.

->But yes, it would be hard to nail down a character as a dedicated psychopath or sociopath, thanks in part to people's misunderstanding of modern psychology. I think writers just want to write a good story without being stuck on accurately recreating a personality type. But even in real life, the boundaries between disorders is very blurry, and they often do occur at the same time. If you visit 3 psychiatrists, you will get 3 different diagnosis.

Also, being new here, I'm unaware on the policies about page length.

edited 6th Aug '11 9:15:59 PM by reub2000