What's your opinion on sociopaths?

[LucyJr]

Good point. I've met a few people who I believe lack empathy, who take joy in other people's suffering. Or I could just be paranoid as usual .

No, you're not paranoid. Those guys exist, and they do they usual stuff.

In any case, I think true sociopaths get their power from taking advantage of someone those who are intimidated by them, especially someone who finds it hard to belief that anyone can lack so much empathy. In other words, they develop their lack of empathy from the people they try to take advantage.

Very true. They continuously search for victims, and most of the times, usually the majority of people fall in their trap of fear and terror. You use the expression/wording "develop their lack of emphaty". I strongly agree with that. I think they have the ability to emphatise, they just don't use it. They try to kill it, to minimize it.

If they see they can manipulate and get under your skin, and rattle you, then they will because they realize it's having an effect. That's where their power derives. If you believe they are as powerful and as dangerous as they say they are, it tends to give them more power and advantage. If they see you are affected by them, then they get the upper hand. I don't doubt they are dangerous and they usually have an mo. They generally go after those who they they believe are gullible and vulnerable. They often target those who are "simple". In other words, they get their kicks from those who they can make feel inferior and weaker. They want you to feel less or beneath them.

Well, you obviously have very good people reading skills

However, if you're not affected by them or if you are immune, you are lucky. IF you can see them a mile away and stay away, chances are you've dodged a bullet. If you're not easily affected by them, then the impact won't be as harsh. In other words, I don't always think it's a case of someone being sociopath or not. Sometimes, it's a developed trait. Depending on the response they get, they will likely adjusts their sociology and psychology to fit the person. They are excellent chameleons. They can seem normal one minute but next do something to make you shiver. So, it depends.

Yep, it's very true. It's so sad that many people are manipulated so easy. I even read sociopaths who pride themselfs that people actually do like to be manipulated, even need it. This is sadly, very true.

I also just think we may sometimes give the sociopathic label to someone as a reason or excuse for their behavior rather than this person taking personal responsibility for their actions and choosing not to take those actions. Arguing that they have no control over those apathetic feels or emotions makes it too easy for sociopath to justify and continue their behavior. It makes them feel smarter and more attuned than everyone else.

You touched it, here. Right to the problem. The question is, do they have free will? Because if they have, then they are responsabile for their actions, all the way. If they don't have free will, then it's pretty obvious we accuse them unethical.

Edit: Kinda makes you think of ethics. Does the fact that someone doesn't have empathy mean they don't have ethics?

I strongly think it doesn't mean so. Emphaty is emotional in nature, while ethics can be understood very well if you have a brain, for example: "Don't steal. If you will steal and you will be caught, it doesn't matter you didn't feel bad about it. You should know that is wrong, and you will be punished". That's pretty simple to me. I also think that first come the knowledge that what you do is wrong, and after a while , eventually you will begin to feel the emotion too, that will "colour" your moral choice.

 

[Radiantshadow]

@Radiant Shadow @muir
I'm just playing devil advocate here, or something like that. Hope you guys know this

Yup =) I'm not demonizing sociopathic traits or tendencies. A diagnosis is not a death sentence. Just because someone has a disorder or demonstrates potentially threatening traits does not mean they are beyond help, compassion, or a satisfying life. In fact, looking beyond any diagnosis at the holistic personality beneath is the heart of good therapy, professional or otherwise. Judgment is divisionary, after all, and serves only the judge instead of the victim. My point, badly communicated, is that it is imperative to be aware of and prepared to humanely respond to potential threats.

 

[sprinkles]

Yes they exist, physically exist, and it's an actual condition.

They probably in a physical sense lack the ability to form certain values based on external criteria (pro-social values). They can of course sense their internal values if they are conscious of their self, so there's still the self preservation and desire, and drive to accomplish what they want, but it is left unchecked by value for others.

This basically means that they are not inherently evil or anything like that - they aren't always even dangerous. However it's easy for them to become dangerous through ambition, because it will be an unbridaled ambition. They won't, actually can't care who they hurt along the way.

A sociopath is more sadly unfortunate for society than it is evil.

 

[LucyJr]

Yup =) I'm not demonizing sociopathic traits or tendencies. A diagnosis is not a death sentence. Just because someone has a disorder or demonstrates potentially threatening traits does not mean they are beyond help, compassion, or a satisfying life. In fact, looking beyond any diagnosis at the holistic personality beneath is the heart of good therapy, professional or otherwise. Judgment is divisionary, after all, and serves only the judge instead of the victim. My point, badly communicated, is that it is imperative to be aware of and prepared to humanely respond to potential threats.

Yes, I would agree with you. I don't underestimate them, as I said they are indeed very dangerous, I think I just "correct-stimate" them, if that's making any sense. The thing is that there are already many sites that actually teach their fallowers to imitate or to even develop sociopathic behaviour. Sociopaths are very much appreciated. It's the kind of disease that many people think it's cool to have it.
And I think they can actually be cured, at least that's my personal opinion. I don't think they have really a disease, what they have is a ethical problem. But again, althought I think what I sayed is true, it's just my opinion

 

[sprinkles]

Yes, I would agree with you. I don't underestimate them, as I said they are indeed very dangerous, I think I just "correct-stimate" them, if that's making any sense. The thing is that there are already many sites that actually teach their fallowers to imitate or to even develop sociopathic behaviour. Sociopaths are very much appreciated. It's the kind of disease that many people think it's cool to have it.
And I think they can actually be cured, at least that's my personal opinion. I don't think they have really a disease, what they have is a ethical problem. But again, althought I think what I sayed is true, it's just my opinion

There's sort of a natural affinity in some people for wild power. I don't know why but I think this is the same reason some are impressed by the deadliest snake, most vicious spider, most killer shark, most badass martial artist, the strongest soldier, etc. etc.

Maybe it's something about abandon, and this person or being who is so impassioned about its apparent goal in life that it is almost perfect at it. In a sense, it's mastery. Very grave mastery.

 

[LucyJr]

There's sort of a natural affinity in some people for wild power. I don't know why but I think this is the same reason some are impressed by the deadliest snake, most vicious spider, most killer shark, most badass martial artist, the strongest soldier, etc. etc.

Maybe it's something about abandon, and this person or being who is so impassioned about its apparent goal in life that it is almost perfect at it. In a sense, it's mastery. Very grave mastery.

It could be something like you said. For me, I always loved the good guys. I adimired both the good and the bad guys, but felt attracted on the good side. It was that feeling that the honorable warrior would defeat its powerful enemy. I love movies like that, war movies that have a certain ethical theme developed in it, like you said, "the strongest soldier".

 

[sprinkles]

It could be something like you said. For me, I always loved the good guys. I adimired both the good and the bad guys, but felt attracted on the good side. It was that feeling that the honorable warrior would defeat its powerful enemy. I love movies like that, war movies that have a certain ethical theme developed in it, like you said, "the strongest soldier".

Yes. And I think one develops a palate for such things as it were. Exposure brings closeness in some cases, and some people feel that way about the 'bad guys'.

Personally I can't - not fully. I can't really watch too much violence, at least not serious violence. I'm not much of a fan of war movies because it puts me in a belligerent mood. Also when I play violent games that are too realistic, I have a hard time being violent. Good example is the Grand Theft Auto series. I mainly play them for the open world, shooting stuff up is occasionally cathartic but mostly I'm only following the story for unlocks and then go about collecting items and cars, and exploring. I actually end up being very benign unless attacked. -.-

 

[LucyJr]

There is also something else.
The bad guys, or the evil ones are not believe themselfs to be evil or bad. Even if they think so, they think its a good kind of "evil-ness", it's a good kind of "bad-ness".
For this very reason I think sociopaths do actually have consience. For example, if a sociopaths would tell the truth, or he would be "weak" in a certain situation, he would probably feel very bad and evil, and very stupid. His conscience would accuse him.
Their values (the have values) go somehow like this: "I must be the strongest, the most manipulative, the best liar, I must out-perform and so on".

 

[muir]

There's sort of a natural affinity in some people for wild power. I don't know why but I think this is the same reason some are impressed by the deadliest snake, most vicious spider, most killer shark, most badass martial artist, the strongest soldier, etc. etc.

Maybe it's something about abandon, and this person or being who is so impassioned about its apparent goal in life that it is almost perfect at it. In a sense, it's mastery. Very grave mastery.

It is often passed on hereditarily

Also it is culturally engrained

You can look at the elites to see how they produce hard hearted kids with a sense of their own superiority

They are brought up under very different conditions to the rest of us

Below is a clip of US journalist Chris Hedges explaining the insights he got into their world when he won a scholarship to one of their schools

Further to that they are also invited into exclusive clubs. So if you are member of the elite you go to an elite university. there you get the tap on the shoulder; this is the invite into an occult order such as the 'skull and bones' or 'the wolfs head' (nice cuddly names huh?)

Within these groups candidates are subjected to humiliation and other processes aimed at forcing the candidate to abandon their nurturing mammalian brain and to instead rely more on their territorial reptilian brain. They are also made to swear oaths and divulge secrets.

In their boarding schools where they are sent away from their parents, they are subjected to 'beastings' which will often be violent and sexual...these are all part of the brutalisation process

Hedges on the pathology of the rich: [video=youtube;L6unS2JF8TA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6unS2JF8TA[/video]

 

[LucyJr]

Yes. And I think one develops a palate for such things as it were. Exposure brings closeness in some cases, and some people feel that way about the 'bad guys'.

Personally I can't - not fully. I can't really watch too much violence, at least not serious violence. I'm not much of a fan of war movies because it puts me in a belligerent mood. Also when I play violent games that are too realistic, I have a hard time being violent. Good example is the Grand Theft Auto series. I mainly play them for the open world, shooting stuff up is occasionally cathartic but mostly I'm only following the story for unlocks and then go about collecting items and cars, and exploring. I actually end up being very benign unless attacked. -.-

Yup, I don't like Grand Theft Auto either. I mean, I would like it if it were to be a good character in it or something, that would fight against the main guy.

 

[sprinkles]

Yup, I don't like Grand Theft Auto either. I mean, I would like it if it were to be a good character in it or something, that would fight against the main guy.

Yeah in most of them it's gray, black, and blacker morality. Really you play a bad guy but the story almost always revolves around taking down a much worse guy or organization, as a kind of street justice. It's interesting in that regard.

 

[muir]

Yeah in most of them it's gray, black, and blacker morality. Really you play a bad guy but the story almost always revolves around taking down a much worse guy or organization, as a kind of street justice. It's interesting in that regard.

Its being pushed on us by a psycopathic corporatocracy to encourage violence by desensitising the young to extreme violence to the point where human life is seen as not valuable

Computer games are also the perfect training for the drone pilots of tomorrow

 

[Shaqie]

What is my opinion on sociopaths?

The answer will come soon, after the commercial break!

 

[LucyJr]

Yeah in most of them it's gray, black, and blacker morality. Really you play a bad guy but the story almost always revolves around taking down a much worse guy or organization, as a kind of street justice. It's interesting in that regard.

Yeah, street justice it's interesting, but still at its core is the pursuit of power. Some mobster think they can make justice within the mafia system. What kind of jutice can be made there, when all is corupted? But probably in their world its a justice that makes sense.

Edit:
That's why I think philosophers have argumented that "the evil" side can only corupt what is already good. They don't have "original weapons". All they do its like a parasite, they eat what is good.

 

[sprinkles]

Yeah, street justice it's interesting, but still at its core is the pursuit of power. Some mobster think they can make justice within the mafia system. What kind of jutice can be made there, when all is corupted? But probably in their world its a justice that makes sense.

Edit:
That's why I think philosophers have argumented that "the evil" side can only corupt what is already good. They don't have "original weapons". All they do its like a parasite, they eat what is good.

There's not much good nowdays because the way people live in the modern world is a corruption and we're stuck in it. To me even the internet is a corruption and I'm a corrupted individual for using it. "But it's not bad! It can be used for good! It can be a tool for the good people!"

Yeah. That's what they all claim. As an extension of what you said earlier about the bad guys not seeing themselves as bad, well EVERYBODY is like that. Everybody.

 

[LucyJr]

[MENTION=6917]sprinkles[/MENTION]
Yeah, I agree with you. Its a thing called hypocrisy.

 

[LucyJr]

[MENTION=6917]sprinkles[/MENTION]
Recently I read somewhere that sociopath would pride exactly on this. He would pride himself that he's not a hypocrite, like an empath would be, for example. And I didn't just read this, I actually heard similar affirmations, not from sociopaths, but from "bad guys". Anyway, I know that all people are hypocrites ( "all have sinned") but it's a difference between people that go against that hypocrisy, and try to to good, and fight with their hypocrisy, and the people who have completely turn off their consience on the excuse that "after all, we are evil, and we are all hypocrites".

 

[sprinkles]

[MENTION=6917]sprinkles[/MENTION]
Recently I read somewhere that sociopath would pride exactly on this. He would pride himself that he's not a hypocrite, like an empath would be, for example. And I didn't just read this, I actually heard similar affirmations, not from sociopaths, but from "bad guys". Anyway, I know that all people are hypocrites ( "all have sinned") but it's a difference between people that go against that hypocrisy, and try to to good, and fight with their hypocrisy, and the people who have completely turn off their consience on the excuse that "after all, we are evil, and we are all hypocrites".

Yes. But there's several different modes of it:

• Being ignorant of consequences or nature of choices
• Being apathetic of concequences or choices
• Being aware of concequences or choices and believing them to be right
• Being aware of consequences or choices and believing them to be wrong, yet doing them anyway
• Being aware of consequences and choices, and actually avoiding the bad ones

 

[LucyJr]

Yes. But there's several different modes of it:

• Being ignorant of consequences or nature of choices
• Being apathetic of concequences or choices
• Being aware of concequences or choices and believing them to be right
• Being aware of consequences or choices and believing them to be wrong, yet doing them anyway
• Being aware of consequences and choices, and actually avoiding the bad ones

Yes, I agree there is a lot of moral ambiguity, a lot of "green areas" like its said, confusion.

There are people who are taught when they were children that an imoral action is an moral action. Therorists usually fall in this. What to me is dearly loved and honored as good, for someone else it could be the complete reverse, and would develop maybe even a emotional afinity toward is own personal good, just like I have.
But I think there is a clear distinction between the conscience of a man, and the very morality itself.

 

[sprinkles]

Yes, I agree there is a lot of moral ambiguity, a lot of "green areas" like its said, confusion.

There are people who are taught when they were children that an imoral action is an moral action. Therorists usually fall in this. What to me is dearly loved and honored as good, for someone else it could be the complete reverse, and would develop maybe even a emotional afinity toward is own personal good, just like I have.
But I think there is a clear distinction between the conscience of a man, and the very morality itself.

Yes. One without the other is dead though. Without conscience one cannot be spoken to through morality, and without morality, conscience has no impetus.