psychopathy

Evidence suggests that psychopathy is probably an inborn trait, possibly genetic. They are born with an inherent inability to empathize with other people - they can accurately identify what emotion another person is feeling, but it doesn't affect them. Many have a generalized fearlessness as well, which means that punishment does not deter them.

What implications does this theory have for how society should deal with psychopaths?

Initiating sick vs. evil debate.... now:

They cant help themselves. But if we study them we might be able to treat it or even prevent it. Lifetime confinement in psychiatric research facility upon first murder conviction.

Most psychopaths aren't murderers. There are many milder crimes they can engage in.

They can help themselves. They don't lack free will or equivalent, nor do they have uncontrollable compulsions. They just aren't motivated by empathy or fear in the same way other people are.

http://www.sociopathworld.com/

I found this blog fascinating. It is written by a sociopath. From this blog, I learned that sociopaths are really, really, really full of themselves.

I don't understand why you think that the fact that sociopathy is genetic would affect my opinion on sociopaths. They do what they do.

edited 11th Feb '11 12:59:02 PM by Grain

Wasn't it that sociopaths tend to be the awkward ones that stick out, and psychopaths are the highly successful people that you'd never guess were abnormal?

If this is true, then... I don't think psychopathy would be an inherently bad thing, if it doesn't always lead to directly harming others. By "fearlessness", do you mean that they are more willing than the average person to take risks, or that they are not rational actors at all?

Where did you get the "born with an inherent ability to empathize" part? I ask because I did a quick googling and Wikipedia mentions lack of empathy. I'm not an expert on the subject myself and I suppose there could be contradictory theories or new findings I don't know about.

^^

The terms are too similar; it doesn't matter which term you use. They are always confused. People use them interchangeably. The blog is made by people who identify as sociopaths, and they get along in society finely.

Norman Bates is a psychopath.

The Joker is a sociopath.

^Eh, that's really not the case, and even if it were technically accurate, it's a gross oversimplification. Psychopathy also isn't really an accepted term anymore, nor sociopathy for that matter: they're both classified under antisocial personality disorder now, though sometimes they're still held as distinct.

There's also a temptation to think of sociopaths/psycopaths as master manipulators who play with other people like toys, but generally such severely antisocial traits are not very adaptive, and most people with APD are the sort of people who wind up living in ratty apartments with no jobs, blaming their parents for all their problems.

edited 8th Nov '10 9:17:15 PM by TheBadinator

^Talk about an oversimplification.

So a good half the internet is APD? Makes sense I suppose.

^^ While it's fair to say that I'm generalizing, my point is that APD is considered a disorder precisely people with the condition are generally *less* successful than without, whereas the pop cultural stereotype of sociopaths is as manipulative schemers who prioritize personal success.

Antisocial Personality Disorder is not psychopathy. Only 30% of antisocial people are psychopaths.

Psychopathy is usually defined as a high score (25-30 or more) on the PCL-R. There are two main factors on the PCL-R - factor 1 is the manipulative lack of empathy thing, and factor 2 is being a chronic criminal. Antisocial personality disorder is roughly equivalent to factor 2.

I was under the belief that Psychopaths are born, Sociopaths are made.

Apparently alot of psychopaths have an unusually small amygdala which reduces their self-control and emotions. Hence one sign is late childhood/adolescent bedwetting due to a subconscious lack of ability to control their bladder functions. This also explains partly, why psychopaths are so impulsive.

Sociopaths are nurtured by life experiences and childhood. They probably won't display the same symptoms as natural psychopaths, but will have a callous disregard for the emotions and rights of others.

Yeah. Armchair psychology.

This thread is proving my point. Everyone has a different idea of what psychopathy and sociopathy mean. Why bother?

^ Well because that's true of almost every disorder. Psychology is very much a *soft* science, it doesn't work as rigidly or in as easily observable terms as chemistry or physics, but that doesn't mean it isn't a worthy pursuit, especially when the aim is helping people.

I'm majoring in psychology, so I'll try to answer this using what I know  ^*

The ability to empathize doesn't develop until around 6 or 7 (which Jean Piaget called the Concrete Operational stage). Prior to that (in the Preoperational Stage) everyone is basically a psychopath since they're egocentric and are literally unable to see things from a perspective other than their own.

A psychopath is someone who never developed past the Preoperational stage and thus continues to lack the ability to see things from other perspectives.

This is just what I know currently. I'm sure people who actually have a degree may find a few flaws with my answer, but at least I gave it a shot.

Coincidentally, The Economist had an article about psychopathy in this weeks issue.

Apparently, a study found that psychopaths in prison are unable to intuitive sense social contracts like normal people can.

Of course they wouldn't. The psychopaths in prison are the dumb ones.

Just butting in here to point out. Psychopaths aren't necessarily killers. You probably bought your first car from a more mild one.

but they didn't fill up the gas tank after borrowing it.

At some points in our lives we act sociopathic or psychopathic. For me, it's a near impossibility since I am very receptive to the feelings of those around me. But sometimes, once in a while, I look at a person in distress and turmoil and think nothing of it. Sometimes it even annoys me, as it prevents me from having a good day if people around me are acting so emotional for reasons I don't care about. I think in the case of sociopaths and psychopaths it's likely they do have some sort of sense and perhaps even an empathy for the lives of others, but it's so small or overcome by their own impulses that it has very little effect on their day-to-day activities.

God, are we having the psychopath vs. sociopath debate again?

Both terms were coined independently to describe what is now listed as a single personality disorder. Whether or not there's a difference between the two is mostly a matter of preference - some people use it to differentiate different "types" of antisocial personality disorder (key difference being impulsiveness and regular or overt lawbreaking behavior - some like to think of sociopaths as "smart" psychopaths that know how not to get in trouble) while others don't. Of course, the DSM-V is likely going to overhaul the diagnostic system of Axis II disorders in a couple of years and make it all a moot point anyways (as well as make my graduate years a pain in the ass. Yay).

Anyways, as for "evidence suggests that psychopathy is probably an inborn trait, possibly genetic," that's not quite it. The evidence suggests a genetic/inborn vulnerability to antisocial personality disorder — there's still environmental factors at work. People may be born with traits that predispose them to developing ASPD, but they aren't psychopaths/sociopaths at birth and it's not guaranteed that they'll become one.

edited 15th Nov '10 3:58:27 PM by Sparkysharps