Thursday, September 6, 2012

Are sociopaths psychologically dumb and blind?

It has been said repeatedly that by definition it is impossible for a sociopath to be introspective and insightful. Why is that so impossible? Very few people bother to answer that question, so I thought I’d share my own ideas about it.

First let’s look at the definitions. The operational definition of introspect is to examine and comprehend one’s own thoughts, emotions and actions. I’m broadly defining sociopaths as people who have little to no conscience, who have flexible personality structures and who are emotionally indifferent to social norms. And I’m defining insight as clear and deep perception. I think these definitions, taken separately, would be generally agreed upon by most people. What I don’t see is why any of them, taken together, must also mean that people without conscience have to, by definition, be incapable of introspection and insight. The very people who say that immediately contradict themselves when they go on to say, for instance, that sociopaths disdain those with consciences and are themselves master manipulators. How would a sociopath know that she doesn’t have a conscience without examining her own thoughts and emotions? And how else would a sociopath be able to so effortlessly manipulate people around him unless he had clear and in-depth perception of other people’s psyches? Also, if one needs to be an empath to be introspective and insightful, how do we explain the prevalence of denial, delusional thinking, neuroticism and self destructive behavior in the ‘normal’ population? It doesn’t take a scientific study to see that knowing one’s self isn’t on most empaths' to-do list.

There’s something rotten in the state of Denmark and it isn’t the herring. It’s the stereotype of the psychologically dumb and blind sociopath. It's spread by professionals and laymen alike and it is based on what they think a 'typical' sociopath says and does and not on how a sociopath sees and feels. The uninformed empath believes this stereotype because they can’t imagine that a sociopath could possibly examine his own thoughts and emotions, with depth and clarity, and not condemn himself. It is quite literally unthinkable for them.

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

Are corporations sociopathic?

Is the corporation a sociopath writ large? The makers of the documentary The Corporation certainly think so. Let's make a quick diagnosis. Does the corporation have a flexible identity? Yes, corporations spend untold millions on P.R. alone, crafting whatever image is required to dupe the public into thinking they’re ‘nice.’ Does the corporation love to play games? Yes, corporations exist to play the game of ‘let’s make as much money as we can.’ Ruthlessness is very often another name of for that same game. Does the corporation sometimes behave irresponsibly? Yup, when it pollutes to cut costs without regard for any potential harm it might bring, for instance. Does the corporation respect social and moral norms? Nope, the corporation can and many times does do whatever is necessary to make a profit, and paying hefty fines is often seen as just the price of doing business. Most importantly, does the corporation lack a conscience? Yes, corporations not only lack conscience, but often never admit to any ‘wrong doing’ whatsoever, even when they are found guilty by a court of law.

Okay, so maybe the corporation is sociopathic in nature. BUT… as always things are more complicated than moralistic anti-corporate anti-globalization anti-western westerners believe. The corporation provides jobs for billions of people all over the world who only want to take care of their families and themselves in peace. Even sweatshops provide employment in impoverished locales where there would otherwise be none. The corporation has played a pivotal role in creating a dominant western economy, one that has been an engine for prosperity for the middle as well as the upper classes and the envy of the world. And the corporation has been a leveler of the playing field, allowing some from historically disadvantaged backgrounds to rise through the ranks to become leaders. The corporation has spread invention, spurred innovation and expanded industry all over the globe, for worse yes, but also for better.

Are corporations evil? Are sociopaths? Or does the question itself arise from a naïve and simplistic mindset to begin with?

Tuesday, September 4, 2012

Guest quote: expanding consciousness

"If you have a golf-ball-sized consciousness, when you read a book, you'll have a golf-ball-sized understanding; when you look out a window, a golf-ball-sized awareness, when you wake up in the morning, a golf-ball-sized wakefulness; and as you go about your day, a golf-ball-sized inner happiness.

But if you can expand that consciousness, make it grow, then when you read about that book, you'll have more understanding; when you look out, more awareness; when you wake up, more wakefulness; as you go about your day, more inner happiness."

David Lynch

Monday, September 3, 2012

Who wants to be a sociopath?

I had the distinct displeasure of coming across this email from a guy named James who calls himself a sociopath. As bad as the email is, it does provide me with the opportunity to address the strange and curious phenomena of the sociopath wannabe.

After much blather, James says,
'There's something you should know about me… whenever I feel emotions, I never know if they are real because I don't stop thinking. I'm way too analytical for my own good, to the point where it's borderline sociopathic. Yes, I'm a sociopath. Not in the sense that I'd steal an old lady's life savings and think nothing of it, or torture little animals, but in the sense that I don't experience emotion like other people... 100% mind, 0% heart, the definition of a sociopath...'

Is that the definition of sociopath? Really? James has taken one sociopathic characteristic, the lack of in depth emotion, and turned it into the whole enchilada. Any reasonable definition of sociopathy would also at minimum include a flexible sense of self, the ability to charm when needed, the love of a well played mind game of one kind or another, a disregard for social norms on an emotional level, a greater than normal desire for stimulation, and of course a lack of conscience. These characteristics would then have to be demonstrated in a consistent manner across almost all aspects of one’s personal and professional lives before you could reasonably call that person a sociopath. James, out of ignorance or sheer psychological blindness, disregards all of this and calls himself a sociopath anyway.

This is a phenomenon I’ve observed coming from several types or groups of people saying they are sociopaths. One group of wannabes who might very well have other 'personality disorders' confuse their 'symptoms' for sociopathy. I call them the confused. For instance, a narcissist might confuse her grandiosity for the sociopath's calculated and laser like focus on self interest. Someone with Asperger's might confuse his lack of desire to interact with others for the sociopath's indifference to societal norms. A schizoid might confuse his social aloofness for the sociopath's lack of instinctive empathy. Another group of wannabes, especially those on the young side of 25 who are still trying to figure themselves out, might want to latch on to the sociopath label as a way of seeing themselves as hard or tough or whatever it is they think all sociopaths are. I call them the seekers. Some seekers might even believe that calling themselves sociopaths makes them 'cool' somehow. Seekers tend to have an unrealistic view of what the day to day life of an actual sociopath is like thanks to modern media. Another group of wannabes strap themselves with this label because they’re tired of feeling. I call them the desperate. They believe sociopaths feel absolutely nothing. The desperate wish to feel this nothingness as a means of escaping depression or anxiety or a creeping sense of failure perhaps.

That doesn’t exhaust the list, but I think I’ve made my point. If I had to guess, I’d say James falls into the seeker category. The tone of the rest of his email is maudlin, self pitying and overly dramatic to the point of tedium. What it does do is demonstrate how easy it is misapply the sociopath label.

Being a sociopath isn’t romantic or glamorous. I don’t have a conscience, so to speak. I can charm and be anything to anyone when necessary, I enjoy playing the occasional mind game with people, I've never cared about social norms, etc. So what? None of that means I go around acting like a movie villain. I’ve got friends, family, a job, a life. In many ways, I appear quite normal on the surface. I’m not plotting to take over the world or running an international crime syndicate or making lamp shades from human skin, and I don't make it a habit to eat the livers of census takers with fava beans and a nice Chianti. I make no effort to live up to any kind of sociopathic stereotype. I do what I must to enjoy the life I lead, plain and simple.

Put your thinking caps on boys and girls. Being a sociopath is more and less than you think. You don’t choose it, you are it. Why bother trying to be anything other than who you are?

Sunday, September 2, 2012

Sociopaths = flexible sense of self, redux

Finally someone in the psychological community explicitly writes about the sociopath's elastic sense of self:
“In fact, most sociopathy involves an individual’s not having significantly developed, across the board, a general capacity to identify with things in the world. It is not just that he is lacking a strongly identified moral identity, he is likely lacking a strongly identified self identity almost altogether… His life is largely about a narcissistic satisfaction of desires, not an expression of autonomous valuated personal projects. It should be no surprise that the sociopath typically feels no qualms of lost integrity when he violates some generally accepted moral dictum. The issue here for him isn’t really specifically about a lack of internal response to some failed morality on his part. Rather, it’s about general self identity integrity just not being a question for him. If a person has no strong sense of self in general, then of course he will probably have no strong sense of lost integrity when he violates life projects which for the rest of us would be central parts of our self identities. In a nutshell, it’s not that the sociopath lacks moral integrity specifically; he lacks general self identity integrity, of which moral identity integrity is only a possible part. So a lack of, say, a moral conscience, isn’t really the central problem for the sociopath. What’s more at the heart of things is his lack of moral identification, along with the lack of any other significant life identifications.”
As I said before, many psychologists understand the “what” but not the “how.” The psychologist who wrote this, however, gets it just about right.
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.