Dare we check the list?

Post Reply New Topic

i was led to this:

[http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/may/21/jon-ronson-how-to-spot-a-psychopath]

Oh, yeah, I know, was just saying things about anecdotes and journalists. But I am the language inspector, not the Debate Gestapo, and I don't give two hoots in a holler if you use an anecdote, so long as you don't get high and mighty accusing me of doing precisely so as you.

I do not see this as that relevant to religion - though I do not doubt or deny that some leaders of certain "religious" organizations might score high.

Could be some philosophical points in there, though, and you just betcha watching for psychopaths is useful in politics - even the most different of us will likely agree on that.

Leaders in general frequently meet the diagnostic criteria for psychopathic personality disorders.

In any group of people who strongly believe in a goal, they are most likely to select their most fervent or most charismatic member as their leader. And these people are usually completely nuts.

Didn't care to finish the second chapter. What a pantload! Author obviously had only been a visitor at most in a mental ward.

From the OP article, here is the 20-point Hare PCL-R:

==================
Item 1 Glibness/superficial charm
Item 2 Grandiose sense of self-worth
Item 3 Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
Item 4 Pathological lying
Item 5 Cunning/manipulative
Item 6 Lack of remorse or guilt
Item 7 Shallow affect
Item 8 Callous/lack of empathy
Item 9 Parasitic lifestyle
Item 10 Poor behavioural controls
Item 11 Promiscuous sexual behaviour
Item 12 Early behaviour problems
Item 13 Lack of realistic long-term goals
Item 14 Impulsivity
Item 15 Irresponsibility
Item 16 Failure to accept responsibility for own actions
Item 17 Many short-term marital relationships
Item 18 Juvenile delinquency
Item 19 Revocation of conditional release
Item 20 Criminal versatility
==================

I think you might be correct in certain situations where leaders of (political or religious) groups with specific goals are selected, but I do not believe the above fits "leaders in general", as you have suggested. So then, the question becomes that of people with specific goals positioning themselves (or being positioned) as leaders.

You do not in fact have to find a group sharing a strong belief in a goal. In my department, again and again, a question came up nobody much cared about. Whoever actually cared got his way. If two cared the loud one got his way. And if somebody WANTED power, they happily handed it to him.

Not every exemplar of the PowerVolk is a psychopath, and not every psychopath, I am sure, operates at a high enough level to succeed outside a small circle. Lots of leaders are going to be nonpsychopaths.

But the ones who WANT power tend to work till they get it.

I actually believe that politics are the evolutionary reason for the existence of functional psychopaths.

But it's only an evidence-less theory.

Are you seeing politics as the cause then? Like a modification to exploit a new food source?

Or something else. Please expand.

Most suggested whys and a lot of hows in evolutionary theory are basic speculation, but if nobody speculates science goes nowhere.

In case you wonder, this is sincere inquiry.

psychopath (n.) - See Anthony, Casey.