Page 7 of 7 [ 106 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

07 Oct 2012, 3:28 pm

GGPViper wrote:
TM wrote:
It's fairly well accepted that a psychopath will elect him or herself over everyone else, IE gun to the head, the psychopath will not die for anyone. Will pursue gratification of him or herself as a "prime directive" with little and most likely no regard for others.

If we differentiate between "high functioning" psychopaths and "low functioning psychopaths" as some researchers have done, Robert Hare does something of that nature in his book "Snakes in Suits" then a lack of social preference for the utility of others is not implicit in that. It can manifest, but only as a function of combined impulsiveness, utility and being purely selfish.

This is an interesting discussion, but I fear it may be one of those that get lost in definitions as we go along.

I don't think that "Snakes in Suits" deserves to be mentioned in the same sentence as the "Handbook of Psychopathy". I haven't read the former, but the latter lays down the law on the entire subject.


One cannot really be well read in the subject without having read some Robert Hare, the reason I found it interesting was that it presented a different image from the majority of literature and portrayals on the subject and dealt with some preconceptions that are somewhat problematic.

GGPViper wrote:
TM wrote:
You start sweating and almost crying when someone has a nicer business card than you?

No. They can have the nicest business cards in the world. It won't make breathing easier when wearing cement shoes at the bottom of a river.


I'm sure the nicest business cards in the world would have a scuba attachment inspector gadget style. Bateman was somewhat interesting as a character, because you never quite realized if he did what was written or if it was merely psychosis.



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

07 Oct 2012, 4:08 pm

TM wrote:
One cannot really be well read in the subject without having read some Robert Hare.

You might want to be more careful with your statements, TM.

We might share ideological points of view in several threads, but your emphasis on a single author within psychology will only last a few seconds against my full repertoire. Care to argue against Science, Nature and PNAS?

Oh, and Robert Hare is the co-author of chapter 4 in the "Handbook of Psychopathy".

Perhaps I deliberately disregarded Hare's popular science work because I wanted to focus on the undisputed scientific content of psychopathy.



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

07 Oct 2012, 4:39 pm

GGPViper wrote:
TM wrote:
One cannot really be well read in the subject without having read some Robert Hare.

You might want to be more careful with your statements, TM.

We might share ideological points of view in several threads, but your emphasis on a single author within psychology will only last a few seconds against my full repertoire. Care to argue against Science, Nature and PNAS?

Oh, and Robert Hare is the co-author of chapter 4 in the "Handbook of Psychopathy".

Perhaps I deliberately disregarded Hare's popular science work because I wanted to focus on the undisputed scientific content of psychopathy.


Well, if you like I can recommend Lykken, Cleckley, Oakley, Blair, Mitchell, Ressler, Simpson, Greely and quite a few others.

The reason I recommended that specific Hare book, is not because I haven't read other material, it is that is does contain some unique material about more successful psychopaths. Whereas much of the research on the topic has been done on "unsuccessful" psychopaths. On that topic, James Fallon is also quite interesting.

*Edit* I should mention that if psychopathy is your special interest, then you most likely know more on the topic than I do, and based on prior experience discussing people's special interests on this board tends to end poorly.



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

07 Oct 2012, 4:58 pm

TM wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
TM wrote:
One cannot really be well read in the subject without having read some Robert Hare.

You might want to be more careful with your statements, TM.

We might share ideological points of view in several threads, but your emphasis on a single author within psychology will only last a few seconds against my full repertoire. Care to argue against Science, Nature and PNAS?

Oh, and Robert Hare is the co-author of chapter 4 in the "Handbook of Psychopathy".

Perhaps I deliberately disregarded Hare's popular science work because I wanted to focus on the undisputed scientific content of psychopathy.


Well, if you like I can recommend Lykken, Cleckley, Oakley, Blair, Mitchell, Ressler, Simpson, Greely and quite a few others.

The reason I recommended that specific Hare book, is not because I haven't read other material, it is that is does contain some unique material about more successful psychopaths. Whereas much of the research on the topic has been done on "unsuccessful" psychopaths. On that topic, James Fallon is also quite interesting.


And the authors mentioned by you are present in the handbook (except Ressler and Greely).

Lykken is the author of the first chapter, by the way.



donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

08 Oct 2012, 8:23 am

Psychopaths are a fad, they do not exist. They're trendy in the same way that zombies are.



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

08 Oct 2012, 12:19 pm

Autists are a fad, they do not exist. They're trendy in the same way that zombies are.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

08 Oct 2012, 2:09 pm

GGPViper wrote:
Autists are a fad, they do not exist. They're trendy in the same way that zombies are.


Brains! BRA-A-A-A-INS!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



brock12003
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1

27 Dec 2012, 2:01 am

donnie_darko wrote:
Psychopaths are a fad, they do not exist. They're trendy in the same way that zombies are.


YES, psychopaths are very real.

Having dealt with two of them I can confirm absolutely that they exist and much like the Devil, your not believing in them will only serve to make you the next victim. Since you apparently haven't had the pleasure of dealing with one I'll just advise you that the main weapon in terms of detection that you will have is your own "gut feeling". After having a couple experiences with the nasties I'm very aware of the feeling that I get when in their presence. Forget about any checklist- you will "feel" something is not right about them. It's a very subtle feeling but extremely important. It may be some evolutionary warning system that has evolved in normal people, I'm not sure. The less amusing means of detection is to discover their true nature after they've gotten whatever it was they wanted from you- be that your money, or your life.

I strongly urge you to believe in Psychopaths.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

27 Dec 2012, 8:02 am

Of course Ayn Rand was a psychopath. She believed that the government is the main source of injustice in our society. That belief and and of itself is clear -proof- of her insanity. What sane person would believe that the government wished to restrict our freedoms, exploit us and abuse us. What sane person could believe that the government is run by corrupt, dishonest and power hungry enemies of our freedom. It is clear as day. Ayn Rand was nuts.

ruveyn



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

27 Dec 2012, 1:03 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Of course Ayn Rand was a psychopath. She believed that the government is the main source of injustice in our society. That belief and and of itself is clear -proof- of her insanity. What sane person would believe that the government wished to restrict our freedoms, exploit us and abuse us. What sane person could believe that the government is run by corrupt, dishonest and power hungry enemies of our freedom. It is clear as day. Ayn Rand was nuts.

ruveyn


Careful - we are a bunch of Aspies here, after all. Someone who doesn't know you is bound to take you literally. :lol:

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer