Psychopaths

[Cunt]

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-11-p ... ction.html

Can these studies be applied to management and executives? If we find that a significant number of Americans are psychopaths, can they democratically vote to approve of psychopathy?

[Audley Strange]

If psychopathy is a neurological condition, is there are direct opposite I wonder? People so crippled with empathy and sympathy that they cannot function "normally"?

Is there a baseline "normal" psychology?

[Schneibster]

From a social standpoint, are we justified in testing everyone for this and insisting on treatment for those who are shown to have it before they hurt someone? Note that this is a different question than it was ten years ago; we can actually hope to do something about it with cognitive therapy.

On another line of speculation, maybe all they need is for the vmPFC-to-amygdala connection to be exercised for a while and they'll start feeling things about people and stop being psychopaths.

[Cunt]

From a social standpoint, are we justified in testing everyone for this and insisting on treatment for those who are shown to have it before they hurt someone? Note that this is a different question than it was ten years ago; we can actually hope to do something about it with cognitive therapy.

On another line of speculation, maybe all they need is for the vmPFC-to-amygdala connection to be exercised for a while and they'll start feeling things about people and stop being psychopaths.

Would you mind terribly if I didn't feel things about people?

I don't think it's right to require people to be feeling beings. I think it's enough that they live and let live. (aside from juicy hamburgers, that is)

[Gawdzilla Sama]

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-11-p ... ction.html

Can these studies be applied to management and executives? If we find that a significant number of Americans are psychopaths, can they democratically vote to approve of psychopathy?

The United States is not a democracy, it's a representative republic. And we send all the crazy people to Washington now. Right Ian?

[Schneibster]

From a social standpoint, are we justified in testing everyone for this and insisting on treatment for those who are shown to have it before they hurt someone? Note that this is a different question than it was ten years ago; we can actually hope to do something about it with cognitive therapy.

On another line of speculation, maybe all they need is for the vmPFC-to-amygdala connection to be exercised for a while and they'll start feeling things about people and stop being psychopaths.

Would you mind terribly if I didn't feel things about people?

The amygdala is the part of the brain that associates emotional content with things. Thoughts, incoming sensory impressions, all get combined with their emotional context at the amygdala. What's happening to these psychopaths is that the vmPFC, which is responsible for creating feelings about people specifically, that is, the emotions that make us social, doesn't transmit that context to the amygdala; people therefore are viewed by the sufferer as objects without any emotional context that would prevent harming or killing them, or engender remorse if the sufferer did harm.

I don't mind, but you'd literally be insane if you didn't. By one of the definitions of insane: not having an appropriate emotional response to a situation.

I don't think it's right to require people to be feeling beings. I think it's enough that they live and let live. (aside from juicy hamburgers, that is)

It's not a requirement by law, it's a requirement by the definition of sanity.

People who don't have feelings about other people are not normal. We have tens of millions of years of social behavior behind us, and those feelings are what made it work. Without them, we are destructive to those around us. It has nothing to do with morality; it's like running a steam engine without a governor. It's not illegal, but the steam engine will explode without it.

Think about it in that context instead of in the context of freedom of action.

[Cunt]

Would you mind terribly if I didn't feel things about people?

The amygdala is the part of the brain that associates emotional content with things. Thoughts, incoming sensory impressions, all get combined with their emotional context at the amygdala. What's happening to these psychopaths is that the vmPFC, which is responsible for creating feelings about people specifically, that is, the emotions that make us social, doesn't transmit that context to the amygdala; people therefore are viewed by the sufferer as objects without any emotional context that would prevent harming or killing them, or engender remorse if the sufferer did harm.

Possibly all true, but none of that says that they would surely harm or kill. Remorse doesn't help victims who are dead anyway, so is wasted.

I don't mind, but you'd literally be insane if you didn't. By one of the definitions of insane: not having an appropriate emotional response to a situation.

I have noticed that many on this forum don't have 'appropriate' emotional responses.
I think they are okay anyway.

I don't think it's right to require people to be feeling beings. I think it's enough that they live and let live. (aside from juicy hamburgers, that is)

It's not a requirement by law, it's a requirement by the definition of sanity.

'Sanity' is no law that I know of. In addition, homosexuals have been called insane, so 'sanity' isn't a measure I have a firm respect for.

People who don't have feelings about other people are not normal.

You are certainly NOT normal.

We have tens of millions of years of social behavior behind us, and those feelings are what made it work.

Spoken like a true feeling-whore.

Tens of millions of years of having non-feeling beings among us. Do they get a say? Or just you with your emotional responses?

I don't care what feelings you say are in your heart. I do care about actions. See the difference between our points of views? Mine lets you be who you are, yours forces others to join you in your emotional crap.

Without them, we are destructive to those around us.

What is this 'we' shit? Maybe YOU are, but don't speak for me, okay?

It has nothing to do with morality; it's like running a steam engine without a governor. It's not illegal, but the steam engine will explode without it.

Wow! It sounds pretty scary when you put it that way. Good thing I don't fall for bullshit.

Think about it in that context instead of in the context of freedom of action.

I HAVE been thinking. About freedom of thought. Think about that a bit while you contemplate changing everyones brains to match your ideal.

[Schneibster]

Would you mind terribly if I didn't feel things about people?

The amygdala is the part of the brain that associates emotional content with things. Thoughts, incoming sensory impressions, all get combined with their emotional context at the amygdala. What's happening to these psychopaths is that the vmPFC, which is responsible for creating feelings about people specifically, that is, the emotions that make us social, doesn't transmit that context to the amygdala; people therefore are viewed by the sufferer as objects without any emotional context that would prevent harming or killing them, or engender remorse if the sufferer did harm.

Possibly all true, but none of that says that they would surely harm or kill. Remorse doesn't help victims who are dead anyway, so is wasted.

This sounds like the BS about motorcycle helmets and seatbelts.

Not only are we preventing harm to others, we are preventing these unfortunate people from being locked up. With criminals. Without treatment. In hell. They and their victims both cry out for our intervention.

These people are insane. You're suggesting we let them wander around untreated until they maim or kill someone instead of treating them. I disagree. Strongly.

I don't mind, but you'd literally be insane if you didn't. By one of the definitions of insane: not having an appropriate emotional response to a situation.

I have noticed that many on this forum don't have 'appropriate' emotional responses.
I think they are okay anyway.

You aren't talking about what I'm talking about and need to think about this a great deal more before you say something that will piss me off seriously.

This isn't a fuzzy standard. It's like claiming there's nothing wrong with someone who has a hole in their head and they ought be left alone. That's as insane as they are.

[Schneibster]

Let me put it this way: these people WILL end up in prison, and WILL hurt someone very very badly first. Shall we treat them and prevent it, or not?

[hadespussercats]

If psychopathy is a neurological condition, is there are direct opposite I wonder? People so crippled with empathy and sympathy that they cannot function "normally"?

Is there a baseline "normal" psychology?

I just googled pathological empathy:

http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/s ... 0199738571

http://ps.psychiatryonline.org/article. ... urnalID=18

http://saferelationshipsmagazine.com/ge ... er-empathy

I only skimmed these links. But I think I might have it.

I don't know what's totally normal. Pathological Normalcy?

[hadespussercats]

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-11-p ... ction.html

Can these studies be applied to management and executives? If we find that a significant number of Americans are psychopaths, can they democratically vote to approve of psychopathy?

I don't understand. What would that approval mean? Psychopaths already live, what's the word? assimilated lives. Many are quite successful. And being a psychopath is different from being a serial killer.

[Schneibster]

The first link, to Oxford University Press, is advertisement with thorough information about a book; some interesting information can be drawn from it and it looks topical for Audley's questions.

The Psychiatry Online linked looked like it was concerned with empathy deficit, which is sociopathy/psychopathy, and like it was a description of a book on it. I don't think its helpful for Audley's questions.

The last link yields this:

In fact, these genes influence the production of various brain chemicals which can influence just ‘how much’ empathy you have. These brain chemicals include those that influence orgasm and it’s effect on how bonded you feel while also influencing some aspects of mental health (no, no! That’s NOT a good mix!). Other brain chemicals influence how much innate and learned fear you have. However, females don’t seem to assess threats well and in females, these chemicals increase her social interactions at the same time she is not assessing fear and threats well (This is not a good thing!!). One of the final chemicals effects delaying reflexes (like getting out of the relationship) and impacts short and long term memory (remember when I talked about how you store good and bad memory–here’s the culprit!).

And since it is genetic, these kinds of genes can run in entire families that produce ‘gullible’ and ‘trusting’ individuals who seem to just keep getting hurt.

Looks like in women this produces an excess of trust that is commonly used by sociopaths to get women to do things for them.

That link looked pretty good and pretty pertinent to Audley's questions and the most informative of the three since it's an entire article.

[Schneibster]

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-11-p ... ction.html

Can these studies be applied to management and executives? If we find that a significant number of Americans are psychopaths, can they democratically vote to approve of psychopathy?

I don't understand. What would that approval mean? Psychopaths already live, what's the word? assimilated lives. Many are quite successful. And being a psychopath is different from being a serial killer.

I would disagree. Sociopaths generally assimilate well. Psychopaths don't; they have the problem much more seriously, and usually other problems to go along with it.

[hadespussercats]

Yeah, I noted that the book looked like a good read, but I only actually read-read that last one, since it's all pop-psychology relationship stuff.

But I've been a little too eager to help or to trust for most of my life. It's gotten me in trouble.

[hadespussercats]

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-11-p ... ction.html

Can these studies be applied to management and executives? If we find that a significant number of Americans are psychopaths, can they democratically vote to approve of psychopathy?

I don't understand. What would that approval mean? Psychopaths already live, what's the word? assimilated lives. Many are quite successful. And being a psychopath is different from being a serial killer.

I would disagree. Sociopaths generally assimilate well. Psychopaths don't; they have the problem much more seriously, and usually other problems to go along with it.

The Psychopath Test posited that psychopath and sociopath are the same thing.