Sociopath World: The functional sociopath

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

The functional sociopath

I liked this recent comment from a reader about whether it makes sense to write sociopaths off as being hopeless cases:

I think it is ridiculous when people say that you (author of Confessions of a Sociopath) must be a fraud; presumably because you are successful and have a certain amount of respect for rules. Most experts agree that there are sociopaths in all walks of life and some say they are particularly attracted to law and business management.

Maybe the people who don't believe you are hung up on the "impulsivity" issue. 'Sociopaths are supposed to be impulsive so how could one make such long-term plans?' they might ask. But everything is a matter of degree. Everyone is impulsive, non-empathetic, arrogant or manipulative sometimes in some contexts. In sociopaths, these traits are much stronger than in the general population, but human nature is such that many people learn to work their way around potentially limiting mental attributes and conditions. Some introverts can enjoy parties. Some sufferers from anxiety disorders can learn to relax.

If at least some sociopaths can control themselves enough to work hard to get what they want (and we must admit that many do if we want to keep talking about sociopathic stock brokers and politicians), and many are able to stay within lawful behavior as well (just about any book on sociopathy will note that they are not all criminals or violent), it seems plausible that there could be some who develop attachments to others or a sense of values. These would not have to be based on empathy. A person might see that following rules increases their chances of getting what they want out of life. They might have an asthetic preference for order. The company of certain people might make them feel good. The idea of a functional sociopath is fascinating and I think the book and blog are great.

I am not a sociopath myself, but have a high level of empathy and the very un-sociopathic traits of self doubt, worry and guilt (and have been in treatment for a variety of anxiety and depression-related problems for a long time). I have a hard time imagining life without empathy, but I kind of envy sociopaths for their boldness and it is fun to imagine what it would be like to be uninhibited like they are.

I think I've talked about this before. I'm baffled by why people would insist that sociopaths are untreatable, unredeemable. If there's even a chance that they could be legitimate members of society, why wouldn't we want to explore that, at least consider the possibility?

47 comments:

AnonymousSeptember 10, 2013 at 12:14 AM
It would seem like treatment would all be, will and behavior modification.
ReplyDelete
Replies
DamagedSeptember 10, 2013 at 3:09 AM
People don't want to compete with a functional sociopath becasue they think they can't win.
ReplyDelete
Replies
AnonymousSeptember 10, 2013 at 4:40 AM
Anything can be done if you really want and actually try to stretch for it. The thing with personality disorders in general, like sociopathy, is that the subject does in most cases not consider himself as being wrong in any way. Thus change is not wanted until the subject is beaten to the ground by the truths that eventually face that person. In many cases, not even prison system is enough for doing that.
ReplyDelete
Replies
AnonymousSeptember 10, 2013 at 5:55 AM
It is a very natural thing for a sociopath to become a saint.

Take an irresponsible, impulsive person who accepts that we all die and can't accumulate anything (wealth, fame, pussy good looks, etc) and that everything is relative (eg the car you find so ugly would have been considered great 50 years ago, and simply miraculous 300 years ago).

If such a person can find a way to contol his antisocial impulses (that includes saying the truth), and do things for the betterment of others, other people will think he's divine. Because he won't be controlled by the typical things (family, country, wealth, fame) that stop one from being creative, altruistic, joyous, loving, tolerant and compassionate.

ReplyDelete
Replies
AnonymousSeptember 10, 2013 at 6:59 AM
So far as I'm conserned, this nation may as well be called
"The Sociopathic States of America!" I know that sounds strange given
the fact that sociopaths are so feared and hated. But consider this:
Most of the super sucessful people in western countries are sociopaths
who live by the phlosiphy that the end justifies the means. In any
strata of life-public life that is.
The entertainers who set public trends, the media people, sports figures,
politicans are mostly sociopaths PRETENDING to be empaths. Didn't O.J.
Simpson do this for many years? Sociopaths have no problem assending
the ladder to sucess until the mask falls off revealing thier true hallow
selves.
Sociopaths are the REAL kingmakers-and the king destroyers.
Joseph Kennady tried to "king" his male heirs Joe Jr. J.F.K and Bobby
into the presidensay. They subscribed to a vile "win-at-all-costs philos-
phy. Murder was the least of thier crimes. Of course, the sociopath media
"sold" them as hero's and myrtered saints.
J. Edgar Hoover, a sociopathic "good guy" and hidden degenrate was the
Kennadey's nemisis. He recorded all the Kennady crimes and black mailed
the family to keep his employment. He long denied that there was such a
thing as the mafia, which was good because both Democratic and Republican
politicans were on the take. When Lyndon Johnson was asked why he took
the vice-president's position, despite the fact that he had complete
distain for the Kennady's he said, "Well you know, every so often a
president gets assissanted so who knows?"
As usual it is up to the PSYCHOPATH to do the sociopath's dirty work
when someone needs to be "taken out." Three named "lone nuts" like
Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earle Ray, Sirhan Barusha Sirhan, and the list
goes on. They all seem attracted to the novel "Catcher In The Rye,"
where Halden Caulfed rages "phonies."
ReplyDelete
Replies
UnknownSeptember 10, 2013 at 11:04 AM
I've only been part of this website, watching and reading, for a short time, and I am already annoyed by all the uncredentialed nonsense people are willing to say with the confidence of fact. Of course, opinion is basically free of charge from anyone, but I would like to keep the market nontoxic and look for the best cost benefit in knowledge and discussion. Is that a sociopathic enough metaphor anyone can understand? So much of disagreement festers from mere semantics. People need to define the terms according to the way they understand them, correct or incorrect. It's even worse than the blind leading the blind, it's blind idiots leading other blind idiots and sometimes getting lost or refusing help or whatever. If you attach too much emotion to the manner of how I'm saying something that is entirely logically derived, then re-examine yourself before making a comment. I think the problem just might show up real personal then.

It's a struggle of incompatibility of objectivity and subjectivity. Psychology is a morass of trashing concepts grasping for vines to pull it from the quicksand of conjecture and supposition. It is true that there are neurophysiological causes and evidence for "abnormal" psychological behavior. There are a lot of different brains out there. Some behaviors and tendencies correlate to certain neurological conditions. You can take pictures of this. You can apply some quantitative measurements and extrapolate probabilities with reasonable confidence. None of these tests or observations can ever tell you of the subjective existence the subject of that neurology (or any neurology) experiences.

The fear and confusion I have witnessed in response to discussion of sociopathy seems a lot like the superstitious brand of fear people may have of robots. What if our machines turned on their creators? Aren't we in danger of being considered obsolete or, even worse, a threat? Those kind of fears make no sense. There is nothing that says it is logical to wipe out humans. Even rendering a judgment on human behavior and its consequences on the environment and well-being of everything does not necessarily warrant the destruction of our species. It would be a waste of resources and drastically overreacting, when many lesser tactics require no violence or subjugation whatsoever. In many, many ways, it is just hugely impractical. Do I need to go on?

Talking about a sociopath, theoretical or actual, almost seems like people are talking about the boogieman. The realization of someone being one is basically of no consequence whatsoever. It could explain their motivations, perhaps even give them some much-more-needed understanding, so that perhaps they don't have to feel the need to resort to lying or underhanded means in just trying to also be a human being. They are human beings. Who's treating who like they're inhuman when the judgments begin to rain from whatever divine sense of justification people think they are entitled to make?
ReplyDelete
Replies
UnknownSeptember 10, 2013 at 11:05 AM
I don't think I'm a sociopath. If I was, I don't think it would change anything about me, other than at least there is comfort in knowing it isn't an isolated anomaly. There are resources, treatments, and knowledge there. I love who I love, I abide by an ethical code, and I place no judgment on anyone just living their life. If there is anything that drives me toward anger it's someone's ignorance. I find reactionary idiots repugnant. They are the factor in the delay in human progress and understanding, not the sociopath. They wouldn't likely resort to deception if they could just be upfront.

I believe there are certain key differences between sociopathy and psychopathy. Sociopathy is often better at social integration, or at least consider doing it, for whatever their reason. Like others have said, you must deal with a person on an individual basis, which means there are degrees, a spectrum, not just whole numbers and ON/OFF binary operations.

I feel aggravated that I felt so aggravated enough to make this comment in response to others. I didn't know people had any reason to give a shit about evaluating the degree of humanity a person has. It is usually the inhuman able to give a truly clear evaluation of a human. Show some humanity yourself, or admit you don't know. Categorizing people has never led us far historically. Now it's neurology where skin pigmentation once was.
ReplyDelete
Replies
onewomanSeptember 10, 2013 at 12:34 PM
@CP-

My suspicion is that part of the reason there's so much opinion that is presented as fact is that up until recent advances in brain imaging, understanding how people think has been largely relegated to the philosophers and moralizers. Like it or not, psychology is a soft science, even as it interfaces more concrete disciplines (neurobiology in particular).

That being said, just because we can only glimpse part of the reality of the variations of human behavior does not mean that there is no value in studying and debating the different implications certain behaviors have on society at large.

On SW, there is a focus on one particular cluster of behaviors: those that make up antisocial personality disorder. The words sociopath and psychopath get thrown around a lot in pop culture, esp on TV and usually in a way that is intended to titillate an audience, resulting in the unnecessary stigma of a small minority of the population. Because of recent advances in brain imaging, however, there is now a danger to this population subgroup if legislation is passed to begin using certain images to give a binary answer to "is this person a sociopath/psychopath?". That's why debating semantics makes sense, because it forces a collision between this new information and the pop culture story that "psychopaths are nothing but monsters".

SW is quite unique in that it gives self identified sociopaths and non sociopaths alike a forum in which to debate this so called "condition" and to explore what the larger implications of sociopathic behavior are on society at large and for the individual who manifests this behavior pattern. I know it has certainly made me think, and also consider the wide variety of human experiences and personalities that have been labeled sociopathic.

For this reason, I think that ME's blog/website provides a service to the part of the population that may be labeled sociopathic/psychopathic/ASPD (and those that care for them) in the near future, as politicians scramble to make the public that has been conditioned to fear psychopathic monsters feel a false sense of relief by requiring brain scans of individuals who somehow end up on the wrong side of the law (or even just get sent to the principal's office too many times). Why? Because there is an enormous amount of evidence that the human spirit is too large to fit into a diagnostic category, and there is candor that simply can't be produced on demand for researchers. The mosaic of perspectives here coalesce to inform our understanding of a certain sort of behavior pattern, and understanding is our best weapon in the efforts to respect basic human dignity and avoid scapegoating a segment of the population.

If you're aggravated by the discussion here, then add something constructive to it. Be a voice of sanity on a complicated topic. We are all ears.
ReplyDelete
Replies
AnonymousSeptember 10, 2013 at 11:55 PM
Oh dash it all! I love you, Vegitopath.
Marry me?
ReplyDelete
Replies
AnonymousSeptember 11, 2013 at 7:27 PM
I find that empathy or moral value isn't related at all in the things I do/don't do. From a regular person's viewpoint I'm a fairly upstanding citizen, don't do drugs, don't drink a lot, hardworking, good Samaritan, etc. I always deny it when people say you're such a good person, or you're a good role model. They just think I'm being humble, but it's the truth. The reasons why I don't drink or do drugs is not because it's "bad" for you, but because I like to be in control of everything, including myself, and doing those things would lessen that control therefore there is no logical incentive for me to do them. If the need ever arose for me to do those things, I would and without any moments hesitation or thoughts that it's "bad" for me. So, there's never any underlying moral or empathic reason for the things I do/don't do.
ReplyDelete
Replies
Jeliza RoseNovember 18, 2013 at 9:18 AM
We're already perfect. The imperfection is IN us. And it's in me, not in you.
ReplyDelete
Replies

Add comment

Comments on posts over 14 days are SPAM filtered and may not show up right away or at all.

Pages

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

The functional sociopath

47 comments: