Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Guest post: Antisocial personality subtypes
Theodore Millon, Ph.D., D.Sc. from the Institute for Advanced Studies in Personology and Psychopathology defined the sub-types of Anti-social Personality Disorder. 'It is Millon's view that there are few pure variants of any personality prototype. Rather, most persons evidence a mixed picture, that is, a personality that tends to blend a major variant with one or more subsidiary or secondary variants.' This chart comes from here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
http://theync.com/media.php?name=20633-gruesome-video
ReplyDeleteThe malevolent seems to be leaning more towards the narcissistic/ sadistic, and the nomadic is borderlineish.
ReplyDeleteMisanthrope - Covetous
ReplyDeleteUKan - Risk taking
Notable - reputation defending
Not able stop kissing my ass, i have more than enough people to do that.
ReplyDeleteI can agree with the concept of subtypes. But I'm going to say this:
ReplyDeleteJinxed, cast aside, misfit, vicious, resentful, anticipates betrayal and punishment, desires revenge, callous, fearless (for the most part), guiltless, begrudging, discontentedly yearning, envious, seeks retribution, pleasure more in taking than in having (seems only natural to me), Dauntless, audacious, daring, reckless, unbalanced by hazard (unless I am payed to be concerned), pursues perilous ventures, needs to be thought of as unflawed (only because it works for a GREAT advantage in keeping other socios in their place if conditions are right, I don't REALLY care though), unbreakable (when needed), invincible (hand in hand...), formidable, intransigent when status is question (deflection).
I'll add some of my own: enlarged dose of indifference, phasing awareness of my own lies, overconfidence in my ability to blend in AND read & predict you, confusion when it comes to moral codes and similar social cues (yet I understand sarcasm perfectly in most cases, didn't always but I pushed myself very hard to learn), but I have one more exception: I am tolerated amongst friends and family, just not long term relationships and yet I am stupid enough to desire one and repeat my same mistakes. Everyone I have ever been with calls me even ten years later and tells me they miss me and still love me, you'd think there's a trend to be had but I still don't trust them. And that distrust is divided equally.
NOW, you tell me which subtype I belong to good Dr.
Yes, yes, but what melodramatic words does each subtype use to call down a curse?
ReplyDeleteLol! now im confused...I think I may have a split personality! Who AM I?
ReplyDeletehey guys, i posted this. Before anyone says I copied the idea on my blog, it's my guest post. :)
ReplyDeleteI may put the narcissist one on my blog in a more readable fashion. hmm.
I think it's common to relate to all the sub-types, or most, but it helps explain why there are varieties of people within the main personality type, since people may gravitate more to some sub-types, than others.
:)
You still owe me an explanation, Notme.
ReplyDeleteOh really? what may that be
ReplyDeletei'm not the good Dr if thats what you mean. the analysis is all yours.
ReplyDeleteBut, as you said, it's YOUR post. Participate.
ReplyDeletepersonality is complex. This is a guideline. You need to check out the other personality types and you'll find elements of yourself there too.
ReplyDeleteeg. with you
indifference -schizoid?
overconfidence- narcissist, even paranoid perhaps?
distrusting - any type/paranoid?
but these come under antisocial too.
I haven't studied them, i've only looked at the ones that are relevant to me, and hardly even properly yet. So i dunno.
i'll be back later.
notme, could you please explain what a schizoid is with some examples of how it would manifest itself?
ReplyDeleteThis place should be re named as psychopathworld. Hare states that sociopaths are the run of the mill criminals who are overly impulsive and have a history of conduct, he states that psychopaths on the other hand are the grandiose, callous and manipulative ones.
ReplyDeletei thought psychopaths are far out there sociopaths. So sociopathy includes understanding of psychopaths too.
ReplyDeleteSince my joining discussion on the blog I have stated that there is a difference between what's considered a sociopath and what's considered a psychopath. I highlighted some differences that I had assumed to conclude myself, I also don't trust nor hold Hare with such high esteem as everyone else seems to. Skepticism, especially when working with unknowns, is actually closer to sanity than terms imposed upon me (psychopath, NOT sociopath). In this instance, I will simply say the Hare corrected itself and rightfully so. I would not want people knowing my name on a mass scale accompanied by my down's syndrome either.
ReplyDeleteHi Reforming. I'm not educated on it i'm afraid. I guess schizoid means detached from others, emotionally dulled etc. I don't know how it manifests, but coming about as a result of other traits seems like one way.
ReplyDeleteI hope someone else here can tell you more about it.
I'm having a mini schizoid withdrawl at the moment, I'll be my old self soon enough.
ReplyDeleteMovie recommendation: "Lady Vengeance"
ReplyDeleteThe final part to what acclaimed director, Park Chan-Wook, later acknowledged as the "revenge trilogy."
Vengeance as conscience in morality. In an interview, he states that "...the vengeances represented in my movies are not actual vengeances. They are merely the transferring of a guilty conscience...it would be more accurate to see my movies as ones stressing morality, with guilty consciences as the core subject matter."
He makes statements about the lack of outlets for an ever-growing rage in people in an increasingly restrictive society.
This movie throws our own morality into our faces in a very subtle way. It forces us to think about the difficult questions that are raised on two levels: the first, what would you do in the characters' situations and more importantly, how does one moral code stand up in a morally impossible situation?
a gut-punch of a movie. NOT for the faint of heart.
The story spans over a 13 yr period (for we know revenge is a dish best served cold). protagonist geum-ja lee is imprisoned for the death of a 5 yr old boy. while in prison she schemes, and deftly executes various forms of vengeance upon tormentors of her fellow inmates. think dexter here.
by creating this invaluable reputation she collects unwavering alliances and undying loyalty of her incarcerated friends/cohorts. they are all complictious in exacting the revenge ms. lee attempts to achieve once released from prison.
this is an unusual film which is distinctive in that it forces the viewer, to interact w/the film. in that once it obtains its objective it poses the question - what would you do for revenge? would you personally and actively participate in revenge if faced w/the perpetrator who killed your child? or would you law-abidingly turn the perp over to the police? LV is unforgettable in coercing you, the viewer into pondering these questions directly. my only complaint is the story in the first half is rather fragmented w/shots and scenes kinetically moving back and forth in time adding some confusion in following the series of events.
she catches the teacher (a serial murderer of children who tapes the begging children before killing and collects ransom playing kidnapping after the children are already buried), locks him in a warehouse. then brings together all the parents and gives them the option of turning him to police or killing the guy.
Then you watch humanity in action.
a vision of ms. lee chasing after a criminal w/her gun extended in the snow is one of cinema's most captivating shots created for screen.
Zhawq you are one weird guy.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/zhawq
Zhawq (4 months ago)
ReplyDeleteHi, I'm stopping by because your video "Aiming to Thin-spire" really did inspire me, not least because I love your realism and awareness (all along with the distorted pics, lol).
And what do I find? You're actually bi-sexual too - AND becoming open about it! Way to go! ... Me, I don't speak much about it, but it's a topic that needs to get more out in the open for sure.
I hope everything is fine at your end, and you'll continue being creative. - I've subscribed to your channel and am adding you as a friend as well... '^L^,
You are some bad ass sociopath.
Ohh Adam,
ReplyDeleteyou've really found yourself an interesting subject here, eh?
Look, I'm not bi-sexual, but I CAN be with my own sex if need be. With this person I called it bi-sexual in an effort to make a connection, and it worked.
Yeah, I guess that's weird in some people's eyes. Especially the eyes of mainstream people, of course. But I really don't care.
'Lady Vengeance' is a great movie. I love Park Chan-Wook. The first movie by him I watched was about a vampire couple, it was so great because it was clean in it's fetishism. Just love that director. :)
Notme,
interesting chart.
All five rubrics fit me, though two of them less than the others. I bet most of us can say the same.
There's too much stereotyping when it comes to Psychopathy and Sociopathy (AsPD).
Can you see why making AsPD one homogenous group hasn't really worked? *S*
Random question: why is ambivalence such a strong aphrodisiac? Ex: you know you're not supposed to sleep with that married person, but you do--just because you know you're not supposed to.
ReplyDeleteYou know you're not supposed to sleep with that bad boy/bad girl, you know s/he's trouble. But you do, just because you know s/he's trouble.
And so on.
If we can't have it, it must be better than what's available to us, or we'd already have it. The fact that someone else has claimed the married one for life, or that so many people have desired the bad boy/girl, just makes them that much more appealing. Besides, doing what you're not supposed to, taking risks, etc, gets the adrenaline pumping, and that can be a huge turn on. See: rape.
ReplyDeleteTHE CHART
ReplyDeleteYou could view the descriptions on this chart as common and potential traits in human behavior.
Yet neurotypicals acting in this way would be fleeting and situational.
The antisocial wiring variants of these traits seem to be constant. It's like these the volume of a stereo turned up all the time . . .
Yet people pay to see loud music.
Especially when the singer is talented.
AMBIVALENCE
If I ignore you. You chase me. Married or single, bad or good . . . chemistry is just that.
I am yet to meet a married man who is worth the stigma or my attention. I go for the single bad ass with no ambivalence. I choose how long it will last when I choose his tight bad ass.
ReplyDeleteAt least bad ass thinks I don't know there are other women in his picture. With the married guy the mistress is submissive by definition. Submission is a huge turn off.
I dump the bad ass just when he thinks he's about to gain perfect control. This whole thing is getting old though. At some point it becomes one too many bad ass.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePick one of each...
ReplyDeleteFirst: Lawful, Neutral, Chaotic.
Second: Good, Neutral, Evil.
Where do you align?
Chaotic Neutral.
ReplyDeleteHm... I have some of everything here, so I'll go with degrees.
Low, Moderate, High
1. Nomadic: High
I've never been a drop out from school before, but I have dropped out of a lot of things. Relationships, jobs, family, etc. I'm definitely a vagabond, no doubt about that. Longest I've been in one place is three years.
2. Malevolent: High
I'd say the only thing I don't qualify on there for is fearless. I know I'm not immortal, and do my damnedest not to get killed so long as I'm not caught up in the moment.
3. Covetous: Low
The only way this qualifies for me is that I enjoy taking more than having, and that's it.
4. Risk-Taking: Moderate
Most of that describes me, in that I try and do get away with a lot. However, I do have a pretty good handle on my capabilities. So, for what one person might consider impossible or improbably, I'll go for, because even if I might not pull it off, I'm pretty confident that I can, and the risk won't be fatal.
5. Reputation-Defending: Low
Out in the "wild", these people are my first targets for fun factor. They have a pathological need to be better and stronger than anyone else, all you have to do is separate the facts from the fiction, and it's down to business. It's a low more advantageous to act like a regular Joe than a badass, because then you seem trivial, and not an obstacle to get past.
5. Reputation-Defending: Low
ReplyDeleteHa.
That worked too well.
ReplyDeleteI'm just pleased to see you still have a hard-on for me, Notey-kins.
ReplyDeleteAlso glad to see that the SNR has returned to a slightly more pleasant level, present company excluded.
I was expecting the usual suspects to hop on that one like a dog in heat, but then you came out of the wood works.
ReplyDeleteCertainly a surprise. Can't say it's too pleasant, though. Seeing Derrida makes me want to smoke. I'm sure you can excuse me for a few moments, though.
"You could be brothers, but instead you squabble like thieves."
ReplyDeleteSoulfulpath imitator says:
ReplyDeleteIf I ignore you. You chase me. Married or single, bad or good . . . chemistry is just that.
That really sucks. I am disappointed in this ...sentence?
1. Nomadic: Very high.
ReplyDelete2. Malevolent: Very high.
3. Covetous: Moderate/high
4. Risk-Taking: Moderate.
5. Reputation-Defending: High.
Femme fatale, what is your native language?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTheNotablePath
ReplyDeletegrasping, pleading
begging for attention
deluded, unremarkable
TheNotablePath
That was beautiful. I might cry.
ReplyDeleteWho is that dude?
ReplyDelete