Friday, October 3, 2014

Brain development

From a reader re this post:


The reader says that he considers himself intelligent and lists a few things that supports his claim. He also describes himself as analytical and emotionally shallow. This reminds me of an article that I read once about the brain development in children who are beat during their childhood vs children that grow up under safe circumstances. It does not exactly describe what the reader is conveying to us, but there is a comparison. Before I start describing the comparison I am making, I would like to say that the article about children's brain development was written from the view of what I think was a brain surgeon if I remember correctly(or maybe it was a scientist with specialization in brain functioning). Either way, the article was not written from the view of a psychologist, which then most likely would have created a very different article. 

The article gave information on how children who are beat regularly and grew up in a stressful aggressive environment develop larger areas in the brain for aggression and fear. This will eventually take up so much of the available mechanics of the child's brain that abilities like logic and analytical skills will suffer. These children grow up with behavioural problems, problems in school, conceptual problems and with the consequences that this follows. They are driven by their emotions, negative ones in this case. Again, a psychologist migh describe this differently, and there are probably many interpretations of problems like these, but this was from the view of that brain surgeon/scientist.

Children who grow up under good conditions develop larger areas in the brain for handling logic and analytical abilities. They have smaller areas in the brain for fear and aggression. They'r total amount of mental capability is probably the same as of the troubled children, but all their mental abilities go to other resources of the brain then their counterparts.

The article further described how the frontal lobe(I think it was the frontal lobe) continues to develop in humans up to the age of thirty, and stated how that was the prime factor why teenagers were more emotionally directed in their decision making then adults in their thirties and above. With a better developed frontal lobe, a person is more calculative, has better cognitive and decision making abilities and is less directed by emotion.

I spent some time following discussions on the guest forum for MENSA in the country where I live. From what I can see, they have a very analytical and factual approach to all kinds of discussions. You will never see them emotionally tantruming, or being in any unfactual or unlogical. These people score on the 2% top in all of society in their figure reasoning tests. Tests that for the main most part test processing speed of information, logical abilities and analytical abilities. I bet they are not sociopaths, but their behaviour could at first glance well fit into the readers description. To be factual myself, I do not personally know these people, I might offcourse be surprised. I am only speaking of impressions.

So MY question is; when is a sociopath a sociopath and not just any human with intelligente to override emotion and analyze facts? We all like to hurt the people we don't like, to nurture our ego, to feel that we affect the world around us and thus give ourselfes meaning, to nurture our own team for our own winning, to have good feelings for what benefits us and bad for what hurts us. We do not all feel empathy all the time, we are not all flowerbeings of endless love emotions(or something). I understand on the other hand that it is a far jump from this to alot of what M.E. describes in her book. 

According to the information I have written here, it could be guessed that a person with a greatly developed brain for logic and analytics might have lesser development for emotions. Offcource, not every one is the same, but it is well known that they who score very high or very low on IQ tests(in the extreme ends) tend to have trouble relating to other people or to society in general. I have seen footage from MENSA members in the United States stating exactly this(youtube :). There are several articles about this on the internet as well(taken with whatever scepticism needed).

Lastly, I don't have any sources to support all this. It is all taken from the top of my head of what I can remember. These thoughts are all guesswork and pieces of information that I have put together. I am not saying that everything on the top of my head is all correct science, or in any way not debatable. I have known several various intelligent human beings. Thus my perception of great intelligence amounts is not narrow minded. With this text I do not accuse people with intelligence of being freaks or diversions of human nature.

Wednesday, October 1, 2014

The usefulness of labels (gay, sociopathic, etc.)

From a not so recent comment:

Labels do not have to be limiting. I like to think of labels as being entries in a dictionary, you can get the general information from them and then turn to the etymology to find out the unique story behind it. In my part of the world, in talking with "queer" sociopaths, labels are invaluable. I get to spend much less time talking about the nouns of a person and much more time discussing verbs and adjectives (what makes them distinct). However, I also fully believe that a label must only be a 'first step'. Let the presence (or absence) of it light a fire that causes that introspection. Labels simply the big picture but the onus is on the one using the label to add the detail.

Rather than rehash what I've written many times to the queer sociopaths and sociopathic-leaning individuals that I communicate with, I'll just paste one such instance. It was in response to a homosexual sociopath that feared adding one more label to his list of many.

"Receiving a diagnosis of psychopathy did not change the person that I am. It merely gave a new vocabulary for the person that I always had been. I could then begin to learn about myself further. There was a word, a diagnosis, for the facets of my life that seemed so alien to others. This diagnosis had research associated with it, which would be a treasure-trove of valuable information for learning. No longer was I a seemingly unconnected mess of behaviors and thoughts. I was able to retain my individuality and complexities, but I now had an idea of what a large part of me was. Like early humans mastering the spoken word, I could now communicate with myself and with others a cherished and important of my being: my psychopathy.


Many argue that the use of labels reduces the individuality of those associated with such. I believe this can be true. I am much more than my gender or psychopathy. I am a complex individual with many nuances and quirks. I am unpredictable, wild, and not caged easily. Would not the diagnosis of psychopathy cage me or put me into a box that I could not escape? I don’t believe so. The individual’s use of the label means much here.

A label can be vital for understanding the conditions one lives with. The chronic pain sufferer the learns they have arthritis can take steps to change their activities as well as accept the potential lifelong pain. The psychopath can learn behaviors to rein in impulsivity and better understand the path they must walk to stay free, while also accepting (which is usually not a problem) that they will forever be psychopathic.

As importantly, this vocabulary allows for concise conversation with others. That said, no two psychopaths are exactly alike: we have our individual differences as well as strengths and weaknesses. However, with a proper explanation, the word ‘psychopath’ can turn volumes of explanation into a few sentences. With those that I correspond with, we can can get to the interesting qualities of the person without belaboring the condition. With myself, I can have a similar conversation, focusing on the quirks that make myself who I am and setting a good portion of the larger picture aside as a single word.

There is no shame in being a psychopath. The diagnosis was a gift for me in many ways. It allowed me to see a bigger picture, even if some details are murky, and allowed me to research the condition in order to live the most fulfilling life possible. It let me realize that there are others like me and it gave me the vocabulary to speak articulately with my confidants as well as my psychopathic brothers and sisters. I am a label? No. However, the label makes many things much easier."

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Child sociopath in the news?

From a reader:

Child sociopath?  The Chinese reaction to his attempted murder is strange - he got a stern talking-to and bought the victim a new rope to replace the one he cut.  (?!)

Sunday, September 28, 2014

Enneagrams

From a reader regarding the enneagram personality system:

Your book was phenomenal.  Maybe it's a side-effect of a good narrative, but I was slightly unnerved by how much I could identify with your behaviors and observations.  

One reason why I suspect I enjoyed your story so much is not due to possible overlaps of sociopathy, but that we may share the same personality index from the enneagram.  

Are you familiar with the enneagram?  As a profound "7-type," or "enthusiast" the pattern of trying many things, extreme sports, professions, people to date, and then getting bored and moving on to something else is a quintessential feature.  Apparently this type can exist independently of the presence or absence of a "personality disorder."  
***
As far as the enneagram thing goes, I believe there's a lot to unpack there with its relation to sociopathy.  In short, the enneagram is a sort of more useful version of the Meyers Briggs to determine useful career paths.  One of them is the "enthusiast" another monicker for a sensation seeker/ creative type.  I know the enneagram seems cheesy, but after I guessed every one of my friends' type at law school (They are mostly 8s and 1s) and they took the test I was right each time.  But I truly wonder how ubiquitous sensation seeking is among sociopaths.  I figure there are risk averse socios out there, or maybe not?  I'd like to hear what you think about this.

All being said, you strike me as an enthusiast.  You hated being bored in a law office (while this should be self evident for any normal human being, everyone I worked with seemed content with their corner office lives).  You did the bare minimum to pass school and the bar while maximizing your vacation time.  You enjoyed sexual exploration.  And you showed the creativity to write a book and lead a cool blog.  Those are all qualities of an enthusiast.  

Saturday, September 27, 2014

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.