Monday, July 24, 2017

Grains of sand

From a reader:

4 minutes ago I finished your book. Loved every page of it. Devoured it in 3 days I loved it so much. I've always been so intrigued by psychopathy and other behavioural disorders. I've thought for a long time that it's unjust to punish people for who they are and their genuine wants and desires. My opinion even extents to pedophiles and all the rest.. But it does leave me confused as I do feel hurting people is wrong (I am an empath). Irrelevant. Anyways.

On the last page you invited the reader to email you to discover your real name. I would love to know it. I had a suspicion too that you were perhaps a male? Throughout the book I kept thinking about your motives for writing.. In the conclusion you mentioned changing the world, suggesting that a motive was to end the stigma around sociopathy, in hopes for an easier future for you, 'in the light'? But was it also somewhat out of boredom, the need for a stimulus? Or not only a protection of yourself, but the possible protection of future sociopaths ("inclusive fitness theory"). Which gave birth to my final question below.

Final query: Can you empathise with other Sociopaths? You don't mention having a relationship with other sociopaths.. I don't know how that dynamic would go, do you?

My response:

I don't think I have empathy for other sociopaths, but for whatever reason I have always had a sense that there is not as much separation between us as some people think. What is bad for one group of people really is bad for all people. I have always intuited that, but used to come up with utilitarian reasons to justify that belief. Just in the past few weeks I feel like I have realized the underlying belief is that for each one of us, part of our identity is our individuality and part of our identity is we collectively make up the universe -- like how cells in the body are both individual and collective, or like how a beach is really just a collection of grains of sand. 

64 comments:

  1. Once again M.E. messes with us with a new post in the afternoon instead of midnight like usual.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "I am human, I consider nothing human alien to me" ~ Terence

    "I've thought for a long time that it's unjust to punish people for who they are and their genuine wants and desires. My opinion even extents to pedophiles and all the rest.. But it does leave me confused as I do feel hurting people is wrong"

    What you're expressing here is desire for fairness, and fairness equally distributed. It's a constant problem for our social species, how to treat each other fairly.

    M.E. nails it with: "What is bad for one group of people really is bad for all people." We intuitively know this to be the case: an unfair system puts ourselves at risk for being treated unfairly.

    It makes a lot of sense that as our awareness of human functioning increases, so too does the sophistication of our legal systems. We don't burn witches at the stake anymore.

    Here's Alan Alda talking to Professor Robert Sapolsky about neuroscience and the law. [VIDEO: 26 mins, def worth watching.]

    My own view is that the social contract will always hold and people who damage others will be ostracised. We are all wired to take advantage where we can, and this being the case, we are also wired to detect cheating on the part of others. In fact, we are far more sensitive to being cheated than we are towards recognising the good things people do for us. Hence pretty much all human arguments, lol.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "What is bad for one group of people really is bad for all people." no it's not... sometimes (actually most times) the benefit of one group of people is based on the sacrifice of another group... life is not fair and it's never going to be. there will be always winners and losers (depending on the angle of view of course).
      "We intuitively know this to be the case: an unfair system puts ourselves at risk for being treated unfairly." can you elaborate on this a little bit north? like what you mean exactly... i mean every aspect of life is risky, why should this discourage people from treating other people unfair if they could gain a lot? (... if i look at humanity, obviously people are not discouraged by this)

      alice

      Delete
    2. Maybe you didn't read my last para?

      Delete
  3. I've thought for a long time that it's unjust to punish people for who they are and their genuine wants and desires. My opinion even extents to pedophiles and all the rest.. But it does leave me confused as I do feel hurting people is wrong (I am an empath). Irrelevant. Anyways.

    Yeah. That's the problem with overly "empathetic", bleeding-heart liberals- except that most of the time, what they engage in is not genuine empathy, but a circle jerk of virtue signalling, designed to make themselves look and feel better.

    Pedophilia needs to be treated like the moral cancer it is.

    "What is bad for one group of people really is bad for all people."

    Subjective morality is doomed to failure, because everyone fails.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Beautiful DisasterAugust 1, 2017 at 4:45 AM

      I am highly empathic and cringe of the idea of being labeled a liberal, as I stay to the right.

      Delete
  4. Find out her identity? She was on Dr. Phil and outed herself. Give me a break it's not some fucking riddle use google idiot

    ReplyDelete
  5. The concept of a group mind is one I would like to see discussed in this context, by all of you and specifically M.E. This article says that we are essentially integrated systems of information reacting to massive amounts of connections, not unlike a computer but we have more connections which create emotions and other characteristics of conscoiusness. What is interesting is how I only found myself wondering by the end, if we were all just single programs with agendas to carry out and that our society was the computer itself. Allowing its system to be connected but not truely integrated, people only relating to the degree that they have already been cross-referenced. Its kind of comforting.
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-consciousness-universal/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you forgot your meds with your coffee this morning STFU with your idiotic ramblings nobody gives a fuck

      Delete
    2. I think disorders like ASPD and other mental disorders and in some cases even physical impairments are caused by inherent animalistic tendencies, like we're not all fully 'human' yet, but that becoming fully human is more of an ongoing learning process.

      Delete
    3. Humans are animals.

      Delete
    4. Looks as if you're unable to resist being an idiot.

      Delete
    5. Right. The person claiming that physical impairments are caused by animalistic tendencies and can be outgrown is calling me an idiot. Or are you another Anon? Why can't you toe dippers just comment under a name?

      Delete
    6. Why do you feel offended, is it because you're physically deformed?

      You might be able to outgrow it but it'll probably take you several lifetimes, sorry to say.

      Delete
    7. Your stupidity is the only thing I am offended by. Sadly I doubt you will ever outgrow this.

      Delete
    8. LOL Seriously ridiculous.

      Delete
  6. Yes, that is because most of our urges are "primal". We have to learn to be more emotionally "normal". There is no end to the learning process it will be always be an ongoing learning environment with ASPD

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If they should fail to adapt over a long period of time then they would not be able to survive in the changing environment but would have to continue their existence elsewhere in a more suitable environment.

      Delete
  7. "I am an empath". No, you are not. Empath is a sci fi invention meaning a person with the paranormal ability gauge the exact mental and emotional state of all around them. Trust me I saw this shit on star trek once. This term seems to be widely misused... What you meant to say is that you feel empathy toward others, and alot of good that's done you if it's causing you to waste time pitying the the plight of every nuisance kiddy fiddler and all other assorted dregs. Keep in mind that these people you're wasting precious pity on aren't being punished for who they are, they're being punished for what they do because of who they are... ME's real name is Jamie Townsend. Except that it's actually Jamie Lund. She had to change it to Townsend because when she went on dr phil somehow people were able to see through her masterful disguise which consisted of a blonde wig and she received alot of backlash, which must have been pretty fucking intense in nature considering even an unflappable psychopath like herself couldn't cope with it. Not really sure how this knowledge improves your life in any way but there you go.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Other sociopaths might be interesting but why would any of them be sympathetic?

    ReplyDelete
  9. I debated a lot about replying, there is a lot on this thread that is wrong in my mind and it will take a small novel to explain, but will try some crib note version.

    There is no moral good, or moral bad. There is no good for the sake of good. There is alway a yin yang type of reaction to every decision, some win, some lose.

    ASPD is not a group of cells working for a common purpose. Teamwork is not a strong trait for those labeled with ASPD that I associate with. Those who integrate with society are experts of reading and manipulating those in their circle. Personal gain is more important greater good.

    One anonymous poster has it most correct, there is continual observation, continual learning to survive. I do not see ASPD as a disorder or a disease. It is more like a different evolution branch regarding how to process emotion. I will leave it up to debate if it is a step forward or a throwback. It is not superior or inferior, just different.

    This still doesn't sound quite correct, but it heads closer to the truth than the direction this post is going.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Step forward :) joking, it's just different.

      Delete
    2. I agree almost completely. "Good" is always contextual and relates to the purpose in question, meaning that "effective" is a more useful term. "Fair" or "unfair" is another more useful distinction relating to social contexts (I described my position and why I think this is important above.)

      I think saying ASPD is an evolutionary branch is too simplistic, as the evidence is for interplay between genes and environment; however the basic idea is on track. It's a feasible neural configuration with distinct and repeating patterns of behaviour, making it a genuine experience of the human condition.

      As mentioned in the previous post, it would be most interesting to find studies articulating psychopathic strategies for solving social problems and comparing them with neurotypical strategies. K@'s response was useful in showing us how you guys experience some of those strategies.

      The reason I find this interesting runs back to something else I was exploring: the relationship between perceived threat and perceived opportunity. Socia commented that they are related in complex ways and this fascinates me; what I'm really interested in is experience and response. I reckon it's highly likely psychopaths / sociopaths experience what others see as threat as opportunity - something that must be dominated or mastered. And this approach is effective in countering the threat (by neurotypical definition.)

      This is a little difficult to explain, but what I'd love to see in a study is complete abstraction so that we are just looking at the situation and the response, and then have an overlay of the person's individual experience of the situation.

      It would also be interesting to see the long-term outcomes of these strategies in terms of lifestyle. I mean, we know these things anecdotally, but putting them into these framework takes the emotive language out of the discussion, takes out "good" and "bad" and leaves us with what is.

      Delete
    3. I doubt I would be diagnosed as a psychopath, but I do have antisocial traits, imparted via my genetics and environment.

      This really resonates with me:

      I reckon it's highly likely psychopaths / sociopaths experience what others see as threat as opportunity - something that must be dominated or mastered. And this approach is effective in countering the threat (by neurotypical definition.)

      I think this is why I like extreme sports so much. I relish the threat, the challenge, and the conquest. Every hard-earned progression represents a form of domination and mastery. And unlike most people, who abhor confrontation, I thrive on it. Each new progression in the sports I practice requires a form of confrontation.

      But it is also a sensory thing. I like strong sensations in general, whether they arise from good food, drink, sports or sex. I need high octane shit to break the pervasive sense of boredom.

      Delete
    4. With the confrontation of each new threat, comes an opportunity to progress.

      Delete
    5. Thanks A.

      I like your summation of threat presenting opportunity. That's the ultimate approach mindset, isn't it.

      I've come across a couple of terms that should prove useful: proximal and distal explanations. Proximal explanations identify the immediate factors, the nuts-and-bolts of causality. Distal explanations are the long-term, underlying hypotheses for why something happened.

      Eg a mother invests a great deal of energy in raising her offspring. The distal explanation is that it maximises the copies of her genes in the next generation. The proximal explanation is that those cute little eyes, it's tiny hands, it's just so adorable and perfect.

      I think we need a few more distal explanations of psychopathic behaviour.

      Delete
    6. To a certain degree, it is worth mentioning Eagly’s social role theory, which delineates the concept that we fill diverse roles in our lives. They provide meaning to our suitable existence, but also cause us to behave rather differently in each role, allowing the investment of innumerable hours of energy. Yes, a mother’s role involves more than words can possibly convey. Similar to an ever-green, her charge encompasses the enhancement of investment in perpetuity without associated ecological harm.

      In support of this particular theory, Eagly shows that successful police officers and soldiers remove their uniform when they arrive home at the end of their day to adjust to their civilian role. This works, in part, since they become individuals again. It is further explained that police officers, who choose to remain in their uniforms after work, are more likely to pass away shortly after superannuation. Apparently, their lives no longer have meaning without the uniform. Hence, as a sidebar conversation, we are presented with the nub of such distal and proximal explanations.

      I do wonder, however, if a mother can do her best only by confidently seeking, and enduringly missing, an unattainable perfection. This proposition would merge both distal and proximal descriptors. Her role is inherently made to exist in perpetuity, to devote herself to the task at hand, unencumbered by the possible presence of moving glaciers.

      Charles Marston. Here is yet another instance of a delicate, but altogether, proximal and distal situation: “Why don’t you write ‘Wonder Woman’ under your real name?” In my view, I, too, believe that everything would change. And such a dramatic change would need to be given more… thought.

      However, not everything would be lost. One would hope.

      Delete
    7. One more thing, North. Do you believe this abnormal behavior in Charles Marston's comic is threatening and reckless? By all means, it is abnormal.

      Delete
    8. Very interesting. "People are most happy in submission to a loving authority". Well, yes, that makes sense. People will give up their freedoms, their autonomy to feel safe and loved.

      Threatening and reckless? Of course it threatens norms, but why shouldn't they be threatened? Think of a bell curve, with one tail being strict conservatism, the middle two standard deviations being the masses who follow norms, and the other tail being the explorers, the ones who challenge the limits of current boundaries, be they geographical, intellectual / scientific, or whatever. All of these explorers challenge social norms. It's a mechanism for cultural change, but proximally, it's the drive each of us has to be who we are and to be accepted for it.

      Delete
    9. “Ah, we'll see what happens. I'm not too worried now.”

      This is a delightful piece of news, North. One of the most generic and destructive daily habits that people should learn how to give a wide berth to is the habit of worrying.

      “If he really did think I were stalking him, he'd have gone to the police by now. He's done that in the past. His father was a policeman.”

      This part of your narrative, along with its detailed assessment, brings a crucial question to mind. It seems to me that an individual with antisocial personality disorder would view police involvement in an assumed stalking circumstance as a drastic measure. A nuisance, really. In fact, there are other, less harmful and less unsettling, measures that can be taken before reaching that vexing and destabilizing point. Having a thorough and civilized talk would work. Also, both of you might benefit from understanding the inner workings of the amygdala’s mysterious functions. “The scanning results showed that our brains can be sensitive to what our conscious awareness isn't. An area called the amygdala, thought to be responsible for processing emotions and information about faces, was more active when TD was looking at the faces with direct, rather than averted, gaze. When TD was being watched, his amygdala responded, even though he didn't know it. (Interestingly, TD's guesses as to where he was being watched weren't above chance, and the researchers put this down to his reluctance to guess.)

      This appears to be your intense fear, not his. Again, seeking police involvement is not how he would approach this delicate matter. In your situation, together with taking his shift and desire for increased closeness into sonorous consideration, the act would be rather dire and unnecessary. Besides, are you solidly sure that he does not secretly like being spied on? Studies show that some persons with antisocial personality disorder might engage in, and be attracted to, both sides of this state of affairs. However, they do not always reveal all of the underlying data, and, frankly, sometimes they even experience perplexity about their own hidden desires. I would not label it as fear, though. You might be missing a few pieces of this puzzle, but remember, this is just speculation on my part. Above all, do away with your worrying habit. Fret no more.

      “Of course it threatens norms, but why shouldn't they be threatened?”

      Precisely.

      Delete
    10. ASPD is not a different evolutionary branch, it's simply the inability to feel human emotion because you are damaged. Manipulation of others to get a surge of what you lack, feeling. Control of others to give a sense of power where there is none. Yawn...

      Delete
  10. There is alway a yin yang type of reaction to every decision, some win, some lose.

    Opportunity cost is a consequence of divine perfection, juxtaposed with inherent human deficiency.

    In God's Kingdom, everything works for the good of those who love Him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The passé ways are dead, A. Similarly, I need and thrive on unconventionality, gusto and extreme hikes. That means spending more time with the creative people, the freaks, the real visionaries, than I am already doing. I must avoid the dullards. They can no longer help me. Strong sensations reign. I have yet to find my tower or edge.

      A person willing to soar in the face of a new threat will never know the real meaning of personal extinction.

      You have made me think about something crisp, chewy and sharp. Confrontation forms. How many are there, and to what extent have you experienced them so far? I would take pleasure in a nuanced, on the ball response in this stripe.

      Also, I had a dream about this impression from a while ago. Unpredictably, it seems to happen after having seafood. There is no available pattern, though. I suppose that if I wouldn’t have clams, yet another impression would zig zag into my dreaming view.

      Delete
    2. "There is alway a yin yang type of reaction..."

      And you should trust that, A. Trust sprouts into progress. You are now wearing the metaphorical, jaunty "sorting hat." What secret is it whispering? Keep it.

      Delete
    3. Meh. I always turn up Slytherin.

      My secret is that I don't trust sorting hats. ;)

      Delete
    4. You have made me think about something crisp, chewy and sharp.

      Confrontation forms..."


      That's an interesting contrast. It made me think of the following scientific defintions:

      Hardness is the measure of how resistant solid matter is to various kinds of permanent shape change when a force is applied.

      Strength is a measure of the extent of a material's elastic range, or elastic and plastic ranges together.

      Toughness is the maximum amount of energy it can absorb before fracturing, which is different from the amount of force that can be applied."

      How many are there, and to what extent have you experienced them so far?

      They are legion, and I experience them daily, both relationally and physically.

      Physically, I push myself very hard. I cannot think of an extreme sport I wouldn't at least try.

      I would take pleasure in a nuanced, on the ball response in this stripe.

      Would you, now?

      Why?

      I expect a nuanced, on the ball response. :D

      Delete
    5. A person willing to soar in the face of a new threat will never know the real meaning of personal extinction

      A person capable and willing, that is.



      Delete
    6. Expectations? Simple. Trust the hat.

      Hmm, let’s see, Machiavella… Yes, your placement is Slytherin, but you have disremembered Gryffindor – daring, nerve and bravery. ”Never was anything great achieved without danger.”

      Six feet of strong and challenging Machiavella and, to my knowledge, a tough and durable hunter ever to snicker at the fanfare of the brittle or the flimsy, or debating whether her sundown drink should be gin or whisky. The restless, deep, upturning forest that spreads and feeds from skirt to fringe, summons its sunburned bravery.

      A metaphorical brain can be crisp, chewy and sharp. However, if I were to pick one, I would choose to chew on an allegorical brainy snack. Chewy is, by far, my favorite… but then, I cannot part with crispy and sharp, so they must visit my palate.

      “Logically, I understand that I am behaving in a juvenile fashion when I am like this, but something in me won't back down when I am challenged.

      This has caused conflict in my life.”

      A juvenile fashion. And would you say these conflicts began rather early in your life?

      “So when they are good they will earn things like Pokemon cards or pizza on Saturday, or they can stay up late, or they get Internet radio. And what they find is these kids really respond to the rewards. And what they're trying to do is recognize that these kids may never feel morality. They may never feel empathy. But they might develop cognitive morality. They might develop cognitive empathy. And that's what they're trying to do.

      CORNISH: When you think about a juvenile facility, often a kid has gone through a lot of punishments, right?”

      Altruistic punishments, one would suppose, since this blog mentions the concept? Hmm, so much for expectations.

      I know that I am, once more, bringing up this scene, but I still have questions about it. She appears like such an intelligent, atypical and clued-up woman. There is confidence in her mélange… her potpourri. Why, do you think, does she feel compelled to engage in this scene, A? And this is not the only instance in the movie. What is the true, unfettered psychology behind her actions? Intent, maybe? No, it is not so obvious as it might seem at first sight. It cannot be. Please, do tell me what I want to hear. Direction, yes? She drives me zany. A purely psychoanalytical explanation must be cracked.

      Is she soaring in the face of a new threat? I must know.

      Delete
  11. Has anyone heard of altruistic punishment?

    Human cooperation is an evolutionary puzzle. Unlike other creatures, people frequently cooperate with genetically unrelated strangers, often in large groups, with people they will never meet again, and when reputation gains are small or absent. These patterns of cooperation cannot be explained by the nepotistic motives associated with the evolutionary theory of kin selection and the sel®sh motives associated with signalling theory or the theory of reciprocal altruism. Here we show experimentally that the altruistic punishment of defectors is a key motive for the explanation of cooperation. Altruistic punishment means that individuals punish, although the punishment is costly for them and yields no material gain. We show that cooperation ̄ourishes if altruistic punishment is possible, and breaks down if it is ruled out. The evidence indicates that negative emotions towards defectors are the proximate mechanism behind altruistic punishment. These results suggest that future study of the evolution of human cooperation should include a strong focus on explaining altruistic punishment.

    M.E. actually has a blog post on it. Anyway, Sapolsky talks about it being one of the mechanisms which kick-start cooperation in human groups, without which it's cheating that pays. Isn't it telling that one of the biggest mysteries of human behaviour is cooperation between non-related individuals.

    So if you were ever wondering why people get so pissed at cheating...

    Personally, I was stunned at the level of revenge-lust I felt at times in the past. There are evolutionarily-based roots for revenge, though, just as there are for cheating, and for wanting to be treated fairly.

    It was really interesting to read M.E. believed she wasn't motivated to punish in this way. I feel like I probably am.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "It was really interesting to read M.E. believed she wasn't motivated to punish in this way. I feel like I probably am."

      You are not sure. Why?

      How would you demarcate your exact response to his limiting of interactions with the world to a few pinprick-sized channels that he strictly manages? Does this frighten you in any conceivable way, or do you find it intimidating to a certain degree? Are you sure that his own life is not bigger than that, allowing it a second thought and, perhaps, considering that it could just be a deductive assumption or intelligent guesswork on your part? From this angle, I feel as though you are not in possession of all of the necessary facts in this sensitive circumstance, and there is more to this individual, who, manifestly, has been attempting to get closer to you. You need to remember that trust is of immeasurable importance in your communications and relationship with him.

      Evolutionary-wise, here is a study which takes your own thoughts a step closer, emphasizing the finding that interpersonal similarity upsurges reciprocal altruistic punishment. “Recent evidence has demonstrated that altruistic punishment is a key behavioral mechanism in the evolution of human cooperation. We show that interpersonal similarity increases reciprocal altruistic punishment. Importantly, this influence of similarity is not explained by group identity, which has the opposite effect on altruistic punishment. These findings illustrate how similarity and altruistic punishment are closely intertwined in encouraging human cooperation. Moreover, because perceived similarity triggers an altruistic response, our result provides a rationale for why similar people are more likely to build stable relationships and groups.”

      He is searching for similarity, North. To his mind, similarity works. He does not see trust or strength in uncertainty and contorting opposites. What is your personal interpretation of this quote: “He's been sent by the devil to destabilize something that was already fragile. How could I fall in love so quickly with someone I don't even know?” Is it due to a magnetic similarity that does not require an inventory of facts and tactical years of accumulated knowledge? I think so. It is possible.

      “My own view is that the social contract will always hold and people who damage others will be ostracised. We are all wired to take advantage where we can, and this being the case, we are also wired to detect cheating on the part of others. In fact, we are far more sensitive to being cheated than we are towards recognising the good things people do for us.”

      Right. So right.

      Delete
    2. "You are not sure. Why?"

      Actually, I am sure. I definitely do this. If someone cuts in front of me in traffic, I will certainly make sure that person knows they've acted like a douche, and not for my sake: it's so they know that their fellow drivers reject that behaviour and don't do it again. ie, I don't do it for my benefit. It's about setting and reinforcing norms, that's very clear in my mind, and I do that in all sorts of contexts: work, ski-lift queues.

      "How would you demarcate your exact response to his limiting of interactions with the world to a few pinprick-sized channels that he strictly manages? Does this frighten you in any conceivable way, or do you find it intimidating to a certain degree? "
      It doesn't frighten me. I feel it's a limited way to live; I don't envy that style.

      But I had reflected on it. We all like to operate in our comfort zones in various ways. Maybe that's his weird way. I don't really judge him too harshly; it's just annoying at the moment because it's playing against me :p

      "I feel as though you are not in possession of all of the necessary facts in this sensitive circumstance, and there is more to this individual, who, manifestly, has been attempting to get closer to you. You need to remember that trust is of immeasurable importance in your communications and relationship with him"

      Thankyou. This is certainly true. Indeed, I think the core of the issue is that he shifted the relationship recently to a greater level of trust. A high-risk, high-reward strategy, that he perhaps feels became too risky.

      This is the explanation that best fits the data.

      "Is it due to a magnetic similarity that does not require an inventory of facts and tactical years of accumulated knowledge? I think so. It is possible. "
      Yes, I think so. There's some sort of un-elucidated shared heritage.

      I enjoyed reading that study, thanks for the link.

      Delete
    3. I won't mess with other people's shit unless their behaviour transcends what I personally consider an acceptable harm threshold. (For instance, I would intervene if I saw a child being harmed, even if it put me at great personal risk.) This has nothing to do with the law. I don't give a rat's ass about the law. I follow my own standards.

      I was taught to disrespect and avoid the authorities at any cost, and to deal with things on my own terms. That really stuck.

      If I see a guy cutting in line, I'll call him on it- but only if it impacts me directly, so it isn't altruistic punishment. Again, I am only compelled to act out of a sense of universal justice when my personal “harm threshold” is exceeded.

      I don't let people cut in front of me. I'm a woman, but I'll confront anyone who does this, even if it's a guy who's 6'4" and built like a tank.

      I don't let people cut me off in traffic. I'll drive recklessly to prevent it, or when someone challenges me on the road.

      Logically, I understand that I am behaving in a juvenile fashion when I am like this, but something in me won't back down when I am challenged.

      This has caused conflict in my life.

      Delete
    4. Thank you for the video link, North. One of your comments mentions a snapshot of not knowing how to feel about certain situations. These instances might involve personal intimacy or a similar type of closeness. If you do not mind my saying so, the climax and the end of the video clip demonstrates said polaroid.

      “Thankyou. This is certainly true. Indeed, I think the core of the issue is that he shifted the relationship recently to a greater level of trust. A high-risk, high-reward strategy, that he perhaps feels became too risky.”

      Risky? What unsettles you the most when watching the films “Magic” and Swedish “Persona”? On the plus side, a nurse seems to be in order when a situation becomes risky… when one suddenly ceases to speak or cuts off communications. Really, what are your conversational thoughts?

      “Well, yes, that makes sense. People will give up their freedoms, their autonomy to feel safe and loved.”

      Delete
    5. I am struggling with this currently. When someone defects with a defector it seems to almost make a positive in a strange way. Like the end of the graduate where they ride away on the bus...the ultimate defiance. I think everyone feels the awkwardness in that scene though. It is almost palatable. The thrill is in the defiance. The running away.

      Delete
  12. Though I strongly believe in altruistic punishment, and not quite sold on the benefits of interpersonal similarity, I think we are missing the tree for the forest. This overall is not a global social question that was being asked, it is how does a ASPD individual prioritize information to make decisions. Altruistic punishment is too global to be useful, and interpersonal similarity is too rare with ASPD to bother with.

    In North's case you need to start with the most simple and stereotypical explanation. The significant other, if ASPD, most likely lied and misled somewhere to get where he wanted to be in the relationship. He had crafted a plan and routine to position himself to that point of the relationship, and evidence of such is available on the phone. Release of that information disrupts his plans and life. In short, North got too close.

    Regardless of facts, the potential reveal of the information could not be his fault so he shifts the blame to the most likely suspect, North. In his mind he can not appear guilty, wrong, and especially disloyal to try to salvage his original goal for North. She must be in the wrong and eventually "owe" him for the sin, whether or not she is responsible.

    He has shut off communications. Why? He has lost control. He appears uncertain and weak. He does not know his next step, he does not know if he even wants the original goal. His impulsively came up with multiple rash solutions, and for some reason ruled them all out as detrimental so has distanced himself to prevent action. He is either watching North waiting for her actions to allow him to resume his plan or he has moved on cutting his losses.

    Possibly, and what may scare him the most, is North had made him feel something he doesn't recognize. Something intense, unknown, brief, and scary as hell. Unfamiliar territory can cause total mental paralysis to a mind craving total control.

    Obviously I have no idea of the details on what is going on. But I do not see some grand social experiment here.

    Nor do I see those with ASPD as an active and willing part of a social group mind working for a betterm all. More as voluntary outsiders, blending in, observing, waiting for the opportunity to find their niche, take advantage of a presented situation, and create their life.

    Sure this sounds like a cold way of stating what every human may ultimately want. Obviously an altruistic deed here and there may improve or indebt someone to their personal benefit. But for those few labeled with ASPD that I associate with on any level, what they truly desire, and what guides their thought processes is complete control of their environment. They don't care much outside the borders unless it creeps into their perceived possesion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow Manic you have really perfected that facade you mentioned of appearing like a boring cunt. So believable. Spooky.

      Delete
    2. Thanks manicgecko, this is helpful to me. I'm addressing some of your points, but not in your original order.

      "In short, North got too close."
      Yes, this is the crux of the issue. Trust is definitely at the centre of this.

      "Regardless of facts, the potential reveal of the information could not be his fault so he shifts the blame to the most likely suspect, North. In his mind he can not appear guilty, wrong, and especially disloyal to try to salvage his original goal for North. She must be in the wrong and eventually "owe" him for the sin, whether or not she is responsible."
      Oh yes, this was classic blame-shifting and it was pre-meditated. He spent a good five hours on it when his original (but similar) tack didn't work.

      "...to get where he wanted to be in the relationship. He had crafted a plan and routine to position himself to that point of the relationship, and evidence of such is available on the phone. Release of that information disrupts his plans and life."

      OK, this was useful. As mentioned, he has recently shifted his pattern of engaging. I think I know the reasons for this: firstly, I said something which clearly aroused him; it's done something to his brain. I'm pretty sure of that. Secondly, I said it was natural for me to accept him for who he is, knowing he'd "been to Monsters University."

      Your comment here got me thinking: he has recently tried a shift to more closeness. It's a high-risk, high-reward scenario for him and it was difficult. He wasn't coping, actually. There are a few pointers to this: some bewilderingly defensive Viber messages, his immediate retreat (mixed with blame) to "now we know we should just stick to once a week and nothing else" after I questioned him about the phone. I now think his elusiveness about that was nothing more than him trying to reserve his privacy and independence.

      "He has shut off communications. Why? He has lost control. He appears uncertain and weak. He does not know his next step, he does not know if he even wants the original goal. His impulsively came up with multiple rash solutions, and for some reason ruled them all out as detrimental so has distanced himself to prevent action. He is either watching North waiting for her actions to allow him to resume his plan or he has moved on cutting his losses."
      Thanks. This fits his patterns. When he's unsettled or angry, he does cut off comms and I do think it is to prevent action. It's pretty sensible.

      He has deliberately not closed the door, which suggests it's not over. But it is, as you pointed out previously, a way in which he knows he can hurt me. No one likes uncertainty, and I've often said this to him. That was well thought through, clearly a pre-meditated plan.

      And given he is away with work this week, it gives him an easy, face-saving re-entry should he choose it: last time I went away, I didn't come online on Viber. So from his perspective, he has a justification either way.

      Wire in the blood: dominance and submission [VIDEO: 2min 20s]

      I see him as my match, and this is arousing to me. I have learnt to accept these parts of myself.

      If he really did think I were stalking him, he'd have gone to the police by now. He's done that in the past. His father was a policeman.

      Ah, we'll see what happens. I'm not too worried now. If he can't trust me; well sometimes things don't work out and that's just how it is.

      Delete
  13. HI traffic. Nice to see you are unleashing your lone insult and superior intellect again. If only you can come up with an argument.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If only I could stomach reading all the way to end of one of your long winded unoriginal hyper intellectual wankathons. We can dream.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your responses (Traffic)are beauties. The flatulent pomposity of the cranially constipated is destroying my ribs.

      Delete
  15. I'll try to use smaller words next time, maybe it won't threaten your perceived alpha male status on this blog. Maybe I'll link another of my abandoned blog paged from 10 years ago so you can do more research. I would really like you to bitch and moan about hiding behind an alias... that one really made me have renewed faith in human arrogance and self delusion. But to each their own... I already wasted my alotted response time to movie educated drones... maybe later

    ReplyDelete
  16. "I'll try to use smaller words next time". Next time? *groans*

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. manicghecko and Traffic.....
      so, how long have you guys been married....?
      8-) 8-)

      Delete
  17. Someone pointed me to this article: Psychopaths have feelings - can they learn how to use them?

    There is now substantial evidence that psychopaths can in fact experience emotions – but only under the right circumstances. And they can display normal emotional responses – when the emotion is part of their goal, or when they are invited to respond to perceptually simple basic shapes or single objects. Yet their reactions to the same stimuli are deficient when their attention is focused on an alternative goal or to a complex situation. This means that, while psychopaths are capable of experiencing and displaying emotions in some situations, what confounds them is complexity.

    I've seen **-* learn from negative experiences... he is still impulsive and risk-taking but he mitigates the risk. To a degree. I wouldn't do those things, but then there are risks I like that he won't take at all.

    What do you guys think?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also, most people don't like me talking about these things. Even the most rational of them get incoherent with emotion. That makes me feel a bit sad, but it also tells me this is an area we'll benefit from understanding better.

      At the moment, they want their discussions of psychopathy to remain safely lab-coated.

      Delete
    2. I believe it is possible. Evidence shows that emotions can be experienced in highly intense and exquisitely homogeneous-in-nature relationships. That mutual likeness, sans a barrage of opposites, must be present for such manifestations. Overall, the article you have provided shows evolutionary progress, and that opens the gate to greater findings. I have been searching for roots, for ingrained specifics, and for those proximal beginnings that should not remain "safely lab-coated." That is an apt description.

      What are those risks that you would like him to take, North?

      Delete
    3. "People will give up their freedoms, their autonomy to feel safe and loved.”

      This is exactly their problem. They will give away everything for it. This is true even if the feeling they get is just their own subjective fantasy, created wholly by their own mind, with some encouragement from the other party.

      They don't want autonomy, they're to weak to enjoy it.

      North would you take his love in order to to feel that way yourself, even if it was only an illusion? Even more, would he likely see you as someone who would jump at such offer, or would he imagine you would recoil back from it, out of self-respect?

      Delete
    4. I rebuilt my world view from scratch in the past couple of years. That's what I do when I find my mental models don't account for the data; it's like an in-life reincarnation and it's happened twice so far.

      We have no idea, now, of who or what the inhabitants of our future might be. In that sense, we have no future. Not in the sense that our grandparents had a future, or thought they did. Fully imagined cultural futures were the luxury of another day, one in which 'now' was of some greater duration. For us, of course, things can change so abruptly, so violently, so profoundly, that futures like our grandparents' have insufficient 'now' to stand on. We have no future because our present is too volatile. ... We have only risk management. The spinning of the given moment's scenarios. Pattern recognition.

      ~William Gibson


      That's my starting point. I take nothing for granted and know that anything I depend on is likely to be temporary. I trust my own ability to master my environment as it presents.

      I've said to him all along that I love him but don't need him. I would miss him if he goes, but I trust myself to live a rich and full life either way.

      He wouldn't make the offer.

      Delete
  18. North,

    Do you think, after all that's happened, you could regain his trust? If so, how?

    Perhaps a third party, mutual friend, could help?

    Know that your worries are likely felt by him also. Like you and others have said, if he wanted to harm you, he would have done so by now.

    ReplyDelete
  19. OldAndWise / Vegas / MamaSquirrel / Puppet Anons:

    I'm not your enemy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do not give this subject another thought. Do away with your worries, North. They can be quite destructive.

      Delete
  20. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I have changed my monicker from MamaSquirrel to MSoeur.

    Recently, I watched ”this production”, and after giving it some thought, I saw a person with antisocial personality disorder longing for a sister. Yes, "they" have longings, too. It occurred during the second viewing – shucking oysters. The film uncovers the bits that make us who we are, and blasts them exquisitely onto the inviting screen. The two characters at the center are not torn in contrasting directions, delving even deeper into their affinities. Although, it explores and experiments with thoroughly ”theatrical components”, the production seeps into a series of sociopathic traits – for the perceptive eye, that is. I am quite sure that watching it again would bare even more psychoanalytical indicators, answering and suitably filling into even more questions.

    As a sidebar conversation, ”studies show” that sociopaths can feel remorse. However, as I previously mentioned, the circumstances have to be right.

    “In that situation, ‘most people should choose the less-risky wheel, whereas psychopathic participants tended to choose the more risky wheel,’ says study co-author Arielle Baskin-Sommers, a professor of psychology at Yale University.”

    The future belongs to those who cultivate and enrich grains, not bludgeons and seething hatred for the unfamiliar and the distinct. That is, no less, an unequivocal sign of strength. I believe our desires are like water, in that they take the pleasing and surging shape of our bodies.

    ReplyDelete
  22. https://sociopath-community.com

    ReplyDelete

Comments on posts over 14 days are SPAM filtered and may not show up right away or at all.

Join Amazon Prime - Watch Over 40,000 Movies

.

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.