Monday, February 15, 2010

All the world's a stage

From a reader:
In the "Handbook of Emotions," 3rd edition, chapter 3 (titled "The Sociology of Emotions") one can read under the section "Dramaturgical Approaches:"

"... These studies show how emotions are culturally scripted as to "when" to feel and "how" to express these feelings. Through the socialization process, individuals learn how to associate particular emotion vocabularies with specific eliciting situations, internal sensations, and expressive displays. [...] What makes this approach dramaturgical is that individuals are viewed as acting on a stage configured by social structure in front of an audience (of others). [...] However, individuals are more than dramatic actors manipulating emotions through expressive control in accordance with the feeling and display rules of culture. They are also strategists who present themselves to others, manipulating their forms of talk, role cues, bodies, staging props, and expressive display to their audience to realize their goals. [...] Various cognitive and behavioral strategies are available for managing emotions. [...] Cognitive strategies include invoking thoughts associated with the emotions demanded in the situation to shore up the emotions, using meditation to arouse the emotions dictated by the culture, or psychologically withdrawing from the situation to mask the incongruence between actual feelings and feelings expected in the situation..."

If that is the case, then the difference between neurotypical people and sociopaths seems to be one of degree, not quality.

26 comments:

  1. Ah yes, that's a good way of describing what NTs can do! If you want a more defining example, think of the older times when a young girl/boy would be "schooled" in the right behaviours before they entered society(Western, of course).
    ReplyDelete
  2. If that is the case, then the difference between neurotypical people and sociopaths seems to be one of degree, not quality.

    degree of awareness?

    awareness of the process would give you the choice to step out of line.
    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with Zoe. It is awareness and reflection that makes the S realize what's going on, while the non-S actually believes in the delusion that all this is real. Friends of mine speak of the inherent kindness of all humans, seemingly completely unaware that everyone engages in pretending and socially sanctioned emotional displays.
    ReplyDelete
  4. Seems to me that S's believe they are the way they are by choice and arrive that way by logical thought yielding awareness of reality as opposed to it having to do with any inherent born brain structure yielding fixed use patterns.

    If this were true, it seems to me that S believes that it may be possible for N to be S or far more S like if they only were more honest with themselves and developed awareness of reality.

    Does S find N vulgar and dishonest?
    ReplyDelete
  5. this view also supports ME's earlier comment that you can go from N to S, but not back. i didn't see why that would be when i first read it, but in terms of awareness it makes sense. you could go to a state of more awareness but never less.
    ReplyDelete
  6. Everyone here seems a bit deluded.

    If an 'N' isn't very good at being an 'N', might he believe he's an 'S' to relieve the pain of being such a loser 'N'?

    Normal people are plenty ruthless and dishonest. You hardly distinguish yourselves by telling a few lies or having some nasty thoughts.
    ReplyDelete
  7. I gather you speak from experience H. Lime? Is that why you are here?
    ReplyDelete
  8. So, does S believe that developing true awareness (seeing things as they are, honestly etc) always lead to Sness? Is S the only real/possible outcome of truth/reality?
    ReplyDelete
  9. Is S the only real/possible outcome of truth/reality?

    No, because truth/reality is neither black or white. Even sociopaths/psychopaths can be either self-deluded or mislead into believing false truths. Even then, truth is often times elusive, particularly concerning social truths.
    ReplyDelete
  10. maybe S is a stepping stone to awareness rather than an outcome?
    ReplyDelete
  11. Normal people are plenty ruthless and dishonest. You hardly distinguish yourselves by telling a few lies or having some nasty thoughts

    unbeliever!
    ReplyDelete
  12. So, does S believe that developing true awareness (seeing things as they are, honestly etc) always lead to Sness? Is S the only real/possible outcome of truth/reality?

    Eh. No.

    I'm not a sociopath, yet I'm also quite aware how much pretense and conditioning is involved in social interaction and emotional response.

    Anyone with a brain knows this.
    ReplyDelete
  13. Aspie say "So, does S believe that...."

    Medusa say "I'm not a sociopath, yet I'm also quite aware..."


    The question was addressed to S not to people that knows everyones brains.
    ReplyDelete
  14. Anon said: "I gather you speak from experience H. Lime? Is that why you are here?"

    oooh, you're so insightful. are you always lurking in the shadows waiting to zing someone with a cliche?

    Good for you. I enjoy needling people too, otherwise I wouldn't come back here.

    If sociopathy/psychopathy has any meaning at all, the eitology can not simply describe a lifestyle choice of a normal healthy person. . . .regardless of the evil normal healthy men do.

    I certainly love myself too well and would rather see 1000 haitian babies swallowed by the earth than than get a spot on my suit . . . but even I know I'm not healthy or better off than 'Ns'.
    ReplyDelete
  15. Harry Lime:

    you say you know you are not healthy - would you ever want to be?
    ReplyDelete
  16. The question was addressed to S not to people that knows everyones brains.

    Actually it wasn't addressed to S's. It was about S's. Unless there is a specific person here named "S".
    ReplyDelete
  17. It was addressed to S and the sociopathic thinking of s. The question on the whole can only indicate that.

    Not in any way to someone not an S (sociopath). In any case, you didn't consider the question. I'm asking if S, who may believe that n's can be s's, think that S is a higher absolute truth. We all have our thoughts on that. I'm asking S opinion.

    At best you could say, I don't know, but I think....
    ReplyDelete
  18. Yes, you're right.

    Semantics.

    I did not mean, "Eh, no, S's don't think like that."

    I meant, "If that's what they think then that excludes and underestimates the intelligent and self-aware N's..."

    Or some shit like that. Anyway, carry on.
    ReplyDelete
  19. Yes but this concept of there being equally self-aware is stubbornly rejected by many S's.

    To them, you don't reach the epitome of intellectual advancement until your heart is a dead fish.

    Just because empathy can get in the way, having it does not make one an intellectual subordinate. Unless you get them to think that way. But that is not unique to you self-aggrandizing s's, men have done that women from the start.
    ReplyDelete
  20. I left out two words in my post above. That error must signal my inferiority.

    Just because I possess the capacity to give a shit about others, that does not make me a fool. Quite the contrary.
    ReplyDelete
  21. Harry Lime said...
    "Normal people are plenty ruthless and dishonest"

    I agree. Sometimes a "David and Goliath situation" calls for that....(not that im religious) especially if vulnerable people are involved and need protecting. There are people in this world who aren't as strong as others when the shit hits the fan. Those types become weaker and weaker as they are continually ground down into emotional wrecks and become victims. I genuinely sympathize with those types, as much as those types really fustrate me. I guess certain types of people just can't find that "fire" in their stomachs.
    I can understand why though, conditioning can be very powerful.

    A little ruthlessness can go a long way in times of need and i see absolutely no shame in learning it, then using it. Life isn't about dancing off into a perfectly lit sunset.

    2001 said...

    Just because empathy can get in the way, having it does not make one an intellectual subordinate.

    I also agree with this statement. I personally think that awareness
    observation, detachment, social acting, calculation, etc, can be used in a constructive way if ever a person finds themselves in a predicament and needs an exit strategy. Call it a defence mechanism maybe?
    For example take an abuser (brilliant actors), the abused may have naturally felt strongly toward that person at some point. However i believe there is a line. When the harsh reality has become obvious, how is it possible to continue to have real loving feelings toward another who is depraved? How can a person feel empathy for another who is absolutely devoid of feeling any for anybody else? I suppose thats where "acting" comes into it. Even dehumanisation in some cases?.
    People can often find themselves targets for whatever reasons. I appreciate emotions can draw a person in, and circumstance can hold a person "there", so to speak. Life often takes unexpected twists and turns. However regarding detrimental sociopathic relationships of any kind,...(relatives, friends, partners)...if ever a chance presents itself to jump ship and save oneself, i say take it and watch the bastard drown. Fuck empathy. If i come across as a "psycho" because of my views on topics (which im not) oh well, thats just my perspective however twisted it may seem. It makes sense in my own head lol.


    Tink :)
    ReplyDelete
  22. lol, tink, nice rant. i thought you said you were the quiet type?

    2001...empathy does not get in the way, it's the emotions that get in the way. emo = feeling for yourself, empath = feeling for someone else. they're different. the first one impairs judgement.
    ReplyDelete
  23. Lol, oh i do love a good rant with a dash of imagination.
    But who knows "what i am", im just fingers at a keyboard.... ;)

    Tink
    ReplyDelete

.

Comments are unmoderated. Blog owner is not responsible for third party content. By leaving comments on the blog, commenters give license to the blog owner to reprint attributed comments in any form.