I think it's a myth that sociopaths tend to prey on the very weak. I typically don't, at least. I don't have a categorical rule against preying on the weak, but unlike the mighty lion I just don't tend to go for the weakest wildebeest. And why is the lion always going after the weak? It must be because hunting/eating is more or less a chore for him. Eating's more or less a chore for me too. I also will not go out of my way to make eating more difficult than it needs to be -- for instance only travel to the grocer in inclement weather, or perhaps always ordering my food using a halting, made-up sign language. Not to say I don't enjoy eating or even sometimes the experience of eating/acquiring food, but like the lion I just don't see the point in making it harder than it is to achieve my endgame.If the endgame in eating is largely consumption of calories, what is the endgame of interacting with people? It's not pure consumption, although that is certainly part of it. No matter how you describe "consumption" with regards to people, whether number of sexual partners or number of friends or people that love you or who would do anything for you, everyone has some level of standards. You don't want to consume just any person, you want to consume a particular type of person, a particular quality of person or for a particular reason. Consumption isn't just about numbers for anyone, including sociopaths. Yes, I could target more people if I only went after the weak, but I don't need to do so, nor do I want to do so. I don't see the point in mindlessly stacking up conquest after conquest, it just doesn't appeal to me. My endgame is not adding another name to my list of conquests, it's the process and pleasure of making the attempt.
In fact, if I see someone weak, I usually just ignore them. If I see someone emotionally limping along in front of me, most of the time I make like the Levite priest in the good Samaritan story and cross over to the other side of the street so I don't have to even look at them. I like my prey to be strong with a tragic flaw, like Achilles. My dream prey would take every ounce of mental strength, agility, and ingenuity to conquer. My dream prey would keep me up at night wondering how I was going to win. I would suffer setbacks and wonder if I would ever recover. I would experience small victories and feel the exhilaration of attaining some progress, however incrementally small. My dream prey would take everything out of me, and that would be the value of it -- all of me.
I wonder if lions ever hunt for pleasure. Other animals certainly seem to:
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if those who prey only on the weak are on a proverbial diet of Chinese food, always hungry 20 minutes post hence. Can't play an attenuated game if your meal is easily conquered, and doesn't the longer and more complex game offer the greater excitement? Might be the Higher functioning S that draws out the play as they enjoy both the discipline and intellect to pursue more challenging prey. To be sure,cheap takeout has its place. It does not seem to offer quite the satisfaction as the pique of hunger, sated by a banquet or a meal meticulously prepared. Curious to know your experiences.
ReplyDeleteI think this is the first post that I've read here with MEs "voice" as female. Hm.
ReplyDeleteHands down M.E. that was the MOST HILARIOUS video I have ever seen you post, especially given the context. I cannot stop laughing, literally. It is your self-reflective wit which is making you more a sexual magnet.
ReplyDeleteSelf-knowledge, self-honoring, shining a light on one's own Achilles heel (inner honesty) always creates an authentic power no one can resist. People want to feed on that inner integrity. (little do they suspect what your favorite meal is)
What was that line in first Spider Man film . . . "with great power comes great responsibility."
Haha, I love your responses Soulful.
ReplyDeleteHowever I think the Spiderman line would be better paraphrased as "With great power comes greater advantage" ;)
I wounder if ME is really a women or is it just projection working here.
ReplyDeleteguy
ReplyDeleteManipulating the weak is too easy and boring. I enjoy devising magnificent plans, this would be wasted on a weak person. big-headed people are obviously the best and most fun choice. I enjoy slowly crushing their ego and seeing the realization in their eyes that they are no different to other normal people.
ReplyDeletei was in a car crush this morning. the car didn't make it.
ReplyDeletethat's a drag Wet.
ReplyDeletenice video. i think the whale was saving that last pup for later. ;)
I'm currently dealing with your "ideal" situation right now, ME. Not only that, but this person is my better, so the stakes are even higher, and danger too.
ReplyDeleteBut the payoff, the payoff will have me set for life, for the most part, if I navigate the situation with tact. It's not a one versus one dance, there are other players, and one faux pas from either of us could end the game. So, do I try to outlast him? Or do I try to get rid of him? That's the question.
You guys know, after you die you have a life review, and in that review you not only experience your life over, but you also experience the feelings that you caused others to feel as a result of your actions. The more people you hurt, the more pain you will have to feel. This is based on very solid evidence obtained by the study of near death experiences. And besides, how can hurting people physically or emotionally be fun or bring enjoyment, I personally find it to be revolting. The deep fundamental nature of the universe is based on love. You guys need to do some serious praying that your brains can be healed of the disorder of sociopathy.
ReplyDeleteI think i'll cope Truth Seeker, thanks for the concern though. if it's true it's only a few seconds or so anyway. Then i'll be dead, so it wont matter.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletewho cares, its not an electrical storm caused in the temporal lobes by a lack of oxygen. The case of Pam Reynolds proved that the NDE's can happen after the brain is physically dead.
ReplyDeletePam Reynolds had a blood clot deep in her brain, and the only way to remove it was to actually kill her. The operation was called Stand Still. They had to stop her heart and lungs, drain the blood from her head, and chill the body down so that it would not decay. Anyway during this time she had a full OBE, and NDE. All which took place while her brainwaves were completely flat.
I am not arguing for any particular religion, just pointing out that there is something more to life than physical reality. I am no saint, but I do know that if you can connect with those deeper feelings of love then if will really make life more meaningful for you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SBscOE2zBA
ReplyDeleteThat sounds about as scientific as scientology.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, the type of emotional pain I've caused others, a lot of that I can't even feel myself, I know that from experience. So, to argue that I would be assailed with something completely ineffectual against me is a weak argument at best.
You find hurting others is revolting?
What does it feel like, to be revolted?
That's something that I don't know, personally.
Perhaps you feel pleasure, but your guilt outweighs it. There is virtually no pathologically good people with enough built-in defense mechanisms that doing bad things causes them all to be sick. Otherwise this would be a very different world.
You seek truth? Here is truth for you: You are not a good person. You are not a herald of knowledge, nor wisdom. You are not sage and knowing. You are just parrot, mimicking what you hear, not truly understanding any of it.
There's your truth.
Truth Seeker
ReplyDelete"more to life than physical reality"
So you are delusional.
"I am no saint, but I do know that if you can connect with those deeper feelings of love then if will really make life more meaningful for you."
You don't know me
I will admit that I have had very mean feelings before towards those who have hurt me on purpose, but I always feel bad about having these feelings later.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how to describe revolting to you without a common frame of reference.
There are many good people in the world. There is no one who is perfect or is pure good, but there are those that come close to it.
TheNotablePath said "You seek truth? Here is truth for you: You are not a good person. You are not a herald of knowledge, nor wisdom. You are not sage and knowing. You are just parrot, mimicking what you hear, not truly understanding any of it."
Your very flattering.
There are many, many, many more people who are not 'good', and I don't believe you're one of them either. If you are, you are a piss poor representative.
ReplyDeleteYou can't describe a simple, everyday emotion to me, at all?
Can you not articulate it?
Truth Seeker
ReplyDelete"There are many good people in the world. There is no one who is perfect or is pure good, but there are those that come close to it."
Here is a thought experiment. In the future the andromeda galaxy destroys earth when it collides with the milky-way. And then time continues to go on. Human existence is nothing but one drop of sand in a desert. When all the humans have died would there by any good acts or evil acts? If not than isn't good and evil just concepts you have created in your mind? Does two people have the exact same concept of good and evil? If not what mechanism are you using to determine good and evil, since you seem to be able to know what perfect good is?
If love is the binding life-force, then Truth Seeker you have a point. If you stand upon a love which is differential then you are limited in your understanding.
ReplyDeleteIn order to hurt another, they have to respond. Jesus turned the other cheek and claimed his place in his epic tragic tale with dignity. Now that's love, in this famous story, is coded with the human ideal of honor.
As an elemental wave this life force brings destruction and renewal. Good and evil need not apply to a hurricane, forest fire, tsunami or for that matter the likes of Stalin or Gandhi.
Note said "You can't describe a simple, everyday emotion to me, at all?"
ReplyDeleteI can't either but I know when that unseen bugger called an emotion is not there.
Why are these out of body experiences always treated so mystically? The brain takes in huge amounts of data constantly even while asleep. The conscious part of us or the part that we think of as ourselves is given only limited amounts of the data. It cannot process all of our sensory perceptions. It is simply too much for a piece of the brain that is meant to deal with sentient thought and higher level thinking to handle. So why is it that if a piece was shut down and we are left to just the general subconscious, which takes in the data that we cannot experience for sensory overload, that it could not reconstruct a setting, events, and objects in a fashion that the conscious mind can understand, a memory. Even with a different vantage point. The fact that such things are even given a mystical appear is absurd and stupid. We know there are more than five senses. You have a kinetic sense a small ability to feel differences in electromagnetism and a variety of other senses that allow you to do things such as know where your hand is from your body even when it is not in visual range. The mind can be tricked into feeling things that the body isn't actually experiencing. The brain has no way to differentiate between fact and fiction(illusion, hallucinations). If you imagine an apple in your head see it with your imagination the same places light up on the brain that light up when you actually see the apple. The image in your head is just as real to your brain as the physical object in the material realm. So again why is all this chalked up to mystical ideas.
ReplyDeleteThe answer is in your own words early on, M.E.: Why not prey on the weak?
ReplyDeleteThe reason we don't go for the obvious, easy prey, is because of the human factor: Intellect.
We need to feel there's a challenge, because our gratification is intellectual. Unless you're a cannibal, in which case you also have better prey on the strong - or the infants.
That said, it isn't a myth that most psychopaths go for the weaker (if not necessarily the weakest). We just don't think of them as prey, and our targeting happens almost without thinking about it.
I think, when they say we always go for easy prey, they think of how we "victimize" people in passing, because it's easy and it's natural to us.
But I also think they have another thing in mind: The way we make our living.
And here it is quite obvious that most would choose to do a con or theft from the easiest possible prey. It is merely a question of doing what is sane, what any normal person would do. Nobody puts themselves at unnecessary risk. - So I do believe to some extent they're thinking about our 'work' here too.
Towards the end you write as if you never meet a challenge in regard to this article's subject. Is that actually the case? If it is, you only have yourself to blame!
It's up to you to do the proper hunting, and in order to do that you must first choose the hunting grounds. There may be obstacles, but that is all part of the whole.
You just made up your mind what kind of game your're after - more specifically, set yourself a few standards for starters, find out where such can be met - and go seek it up!
If you don't, you'll end up letting dissatisfaction eat you up from within. And that's not what you want, I can tell that much!
Good luck with it!... '^L^,
Ps. A propos, I'm about to set myself if not a new goal entirely, then at least a whole new set of method structure (I write about it in today's article on my blog).
??
ReplyDelete