The possibility of change

Is it possible that people with sociopathic traits might not necessarily like the way their life is going? And if so, is it possible for them to change? From a commenter, "I made myself believe I had changed, because I changed my behavior, but my thought process is the same":

So it occurred to me by accident (someone said it as a joke while I was trying to explain why I feel different) that I'm probably a sociopath. The thing is, going off of some of these "medical" articles, I can't be. But reading what other people say about themselves, It seems pretty accurate. 

I DO THINK I feel some emotions, but I know for a fact I fake MOST. What's concerning me (the reason I started the conversation that led to that "joke") is that I'm not actually sure if my emotions that I THOUGHT were genuine are also bullshit. I know I've felt genuine remorse, I can remember 2 instances that I KNOW were real (because I didn't tell anyone about it, nobody was around to see my theatrics and I cried because I know I caused someone pain.) Both of these instances involve the same person. I think I feel some empathy, but I don't know if i actually do. Like I get it on an intellectual level, but I don't know that I actually FEEL IT. I know there have been some instances where I FORCE MYSELF to try to put myself in someone's shoes but it doesn't move me that. I have done a lot of grimy things "for fun" I spent a lot of time just playing games with people (basically every relationship). 

Occasionally I would make people stay away from me. I'd tell myself I was doing this out of some type of kindness but if I think back honestly, it's more likely that they were too easy to control or too predictable. I created chaos nd manipulated situations to make them interesting "lets see what will happen if...." I don't like people who are cruel "for no reason" I do feel rage at things that I perceive as wrong or unjust, I do try to do "nice things" for strangers. But I'm not sure what my motivation is for it. I've always been a liar, but I hate liars. I've never been faithful in a relationship but I would get I THINK genuinely angry if someone Acted as though they suspected me of anything. I have "morals" but it's not based on emotion and they get real fuzzy when it suits me. 

I found someone who was just like me. From the moment we met we knew it. I was in "a relationship" with him for 4 years and I was fascinated by him. by trying to destroy him. He's everything I hate and it made me NEED to be around him. I didn't love him. He didn't love me. He also hated me. But we got to be ourselves, we got to try to outwit each other. It was fun until it got boring. It's so fucking weird. idk you guys don't care lol. 

The thing is, I feel like I want to FIX this disconnect. I'm not okay with this. I made myself believe I had changed, because I changed my behavior, but my thought process is the same. Idk what I'm hoping to get out of this. I actually DO want to be a good person. I WANT to feel bad about doing wrong, but I don't. "Shame" is an act, unless I'm embarrassed. I do think I love, but I think it's a very selfish variation because I do turn on people I "love" very viciously if they make me angry. But I also am vicious to those who hurt the ones I "love" so there's SOMETHING there. I have a baby now. I don't want to mess her up. Idk what to do.

How Empaths can Attain Sociopathic Abilities

From a reader under the subject line of the post title:

I think one of the most seductive features of your blog is the sense that people are getting this window into this world of having immense social power. It's certainly how it's been for me. Partly by reading your blog (and similar material), I really developed a strong interest in actually having such abilities.

Now, I am rather good at a few unnamed things. What I've learned from those things is that practice is the only way to get better. Sociopaths aren't born with social talent. They develop it by having no inhibitions, and as such have a constant feedback loop where they are stimulated by extrinsic rewards (power, favors, etc.) instead of intrinsic rewards (love, fun, connection). Having that intrinsic reward loop shut off turns on a completely different reward system. Learning is very closely related to reward, so sociopaths learn very fast and from a very young age how to manipulate people.

For empaths, reading books (i.e. 48 Laws of Power) is a start. It doesn't actually help you much right away - it raises your awareness level, but if those books don't already seem intuitive, you're going to struggle for a while at first. Books like that build that framework of extrinsic rewards obtained from social interactions and help scaffold learning in everyday interactions. To truly train yourself, however, you need more.

My number one training activity of social interactions is to imagine myself as another person, with all of their different feelings, interests, etc. What's it like to be them, in a normal situation, with their own thoughts, insecurities, emotions, self-delusions of superiority, etc. This is like learning perspective, form and lighting for art - the scaffolding on which you build your toolkit.

Meditation helps you get to a state where this actually becomes easier, and your gut instinct about others becomes better because you gain a much more nuanced version of all of the little subconscious things happening in your brain. Likewise, you can start to sense these nuances in others.

Applying this gut instinct, cognitive empathy and meditation gets results. Each month I look back and wonder how I was so clueless in the previous month, like my learning is so rapid that I'm gaining years of average improvement in the time span of two weeks to a month.

It's been an incredibly transformative experience. I hardly recognize myself a couple years ago, and cringe when I imagine it.

Defiance

Last Kierkegaard, I thought this was an apt description of a particular type of personality disorder, you can guess which:

The Despair of Defiance
Unlike the despair of weakness, the despair of defiance is the despair of wanting in desperation to be oneself. Here despair is conscious of itself as an activity. The self 's identity comes not from "outside" but directly from the self. It is rooted in the consciousness of an infinitude, of being related to the infinite, and it is this self the despairer wants to be. In other words, such a self severs itself from any relationship to the power that has established it.

It wants desperately to rule over itself, create itself, make this self what it wants it to be, and determine what it will have and what it will not have. The one who lives in defiance does not truly put on a self, nor does he see his task in his given self. No, by virtue of his own "infinitude" he constructs his own self by himself and for himself.

The defiant self recognizes no power other than its own. It is content with taking notice only of itself, which it does by means of bestowing infinite interest and significance on all its enterprises. In the process of its wish to be its own master, however, it works its way into the exact opposite; it really becomes no self, and thus despairs. As it acts, there is nothing eternally firm on which it stands. Yes, the defiant self is its own master, absolutely (as one says) its own master, and yet exactly this is despair.

Upon closer examination it is easy to see that this absolute ruler is a king without a country. He really rules over nothing. His position, his kingdom, his sovereignty, is subject to the dictates of rebellion at any moment. This is because such a self is forever building castles in the air, and just when it seems on the point of having the building finished, at a whim it can – and often does – dissolve the whole thing into nothing.

When confronted with earthly need, a temporal cross, a thorn in the flesh that grows too deep to be removed, the defiant self is offended. It uses the suffering as an excuse to take offense at all existence. Such a person wants to be himself in spite of suffering, but not in "spite of it" in the sense of being without it. No, he now wants to spite or defy all existence and be himself with it, taking it along in steely resignation with him, almost flying in the face of his agony. Does he have hope in the possibility of help? No!

Does he recognize that for God everything is possible? No! Will he ask help of any other? No! That for the entire world he will not do. If it came to that, he would rather be himself with all the torments of hell than ask for help.

Ah, demonic madness! Such a self wants to be itself in hatreds towards existence, to be itself according to its own misery. It does not even want so much as to sever itself defiantly from the power that established it but in sheer spite to push itself on that power, importune it, hold on to it out of malice. In rebelling against existence the defiant self will here nothing of the comfort eternity offers. This comfort would be to his undoing, an objection to the whole of his existence. It is, to describe it figuratively, as if a writer were to make a slip of a pen and the error to become conscious of itself as such and then wanted to rebel against the author. Out of hatred for Him, the error forbids the author to correct it and in manic defiance says to him “No, I will not be changed, I will stand as a witness against you, a witness to the fact that you are a second-rate author.” Yes, this is the despair of defiance, and what despair it is!

The Cipher

I liked this other passage from Kierkegaard's The Sickness Unto Death regarding another loss of sense of self. This one is interesting to me because I have just recently come to know someone who fits this description. I otherwise would have never believed that this type of person existed, because it seems so odd to react to the uncertainty and risks of life by giving up one's sense of agency and power in exchange for the peaceful burden-free life of victimhood. (Probably because I reacted in the opposite way myself.)

Regarding the despair of weakness:

But the despair is essentially that of weakness, a passive experience; its form is, in despair at not wanting to be oneself.
***
The despair of weakness is the despair of not wanting to be oneself. This kind of despair is a passivity of the self. It’s frame of reference is the pleasant and the unpleasant. What matter is what happens or does not happen to oneself. 

True despair is to lose the Eternal, but this kind of despair does not occur to the one who despairs in weakness. He is too preoccupied with securing his earthly existence. To lose the earthly is not true despair, yet that is precisely what this person calls despair. He is turned around and what he says must be understood backwards. He stands there pointing to something that is not really despair (a loss of some kind); he is explaining that he is in despair, and yes, sure enough, the despair is going on, but it is behind him and he is unaware of it. If everything suddenly changes and his wishes are fulfilled, then happiness returns to him. When help comes from outside happiness is restored to him and he begins where he left off. Yet he neither was nor becomes a self. He simply carries on living merely on the level of what is immediate and what is happening around him. 

This form of despair consists of not wanting to be a self. Actually, it consists of wanting to be someone else! Such a self refuses to take responsibility. Life is but a game of chance. Hence, in the moment of despair, when no help comes, such a person wants desperately to become someone else. And yet a despairer of this kind, whose only wish is the craziest of all wishes — to be someone else — is in love with a fancy that change can be made as easily as one puts on another coat. Or to put it differently, he knows himself only by his coat. He simply doesn’t know himself! He knows what it is to have a self only in externals. There could hardly be a more absurd confusion, for a self differs precisely, no infinitely, from those externals. It is impossible to draw a picture of him that is not comic.

"What if I were to become another, were to get myself a new self?" 

Yes, but if he did become another, I wonder if he would recognize himself again! It is related of a peasant who came cleanly shaven to the Capital, and had made so much money that he could buy himself a pair of shoes and stockings and still had enough left over to get drunk on -- it is related that as he was trying in his drunken state to find his way home he lay down in the middle of the highway and fell asleep. Then along came a wagon, and the driver shouted to him to move or he would run over his legs. Then the drunken peasant awoke, looked at his legs, and since by reason of the shoes and stockings he didn't recognize them, he said to the driver, "Drive on, they are not my legs." So in the case of the immediate man when he is in despair it is impossible to represent him truly without a touch of the comic.

A girl has no name

What happens to people with personality disorders to make them the way they are? Speaking from personal experience, but also saying something that can easily generalize much more broadly, there is a genetic component but it is also triggered. When you are little, instead of developing a sense of your own identity, you learn to think of yourself as a cipher. You do it because there is no advantage to you in being a particular someone (much less the particular person you are), and every advantage in being whatever the situation calls for, in blending in with the background, in being the strings that pull other people rather than being a person yourself. Kierkegaard speaks of something similar:

For every man is primitively planned to be a self, appointed to become oneself; and while it is true that every self as such is angular, the logical consequence of this merely is that it has to be polished, not that it has to be ground smooth, not that for fear of men it has to give up entirely being itself, nor even that for fear of men it dare not be itself in its essential accidentality (which precisely is what should not be ground away), by which in fine it is itself. 

***

[But when the sense of self is lost] he may nevertheless (although most commonly it becomes manifest) be perfectly well able to live on, to be a man, as it seems, to occupy himself with temporal things, get married, beget children, win honor and esteem -- and perhaps no one notices that in a deeper sense he lacks a self. About such a thing as that not much fuss is made in the world; for a self is the thing the world is least apt to inquire about, and the thing of all things the most dangerous for a man to let people notice that he has it. The greatest danger, that of losing one's own self, may pass off as quietly as if it were nothing; every other loss, that of an arm, a leg, five dollars, a wife, etc., is sure to be noticed.

***

But while one sort of despair plunges wildly into the infinite and loses itself, a second sort permits itself as it were to be defrauded by "the others." By seeing the multitude of men about it, by getting engaged in all sorts of worldly affairs, by becoming wise about how things go in this world, such a man forgets himself, forgets what his name is (in the divine understanding of it), does not dare to believe in himself, finds it too venturesome a thing to be himself, far easier and safer to be like the others, to become an imitation, a number, a cipher in the crowd.

So a personality disordered person might lose their sense of self, but it can actually be as empowering as it is tragic. Without a self, there isn't the same potential for ego hurt -- we no longer live a life motivated largely by fear. The most vulnerable and valuable part of us has already died. What is left is a cipher, a thing that can take the form and shape of whatever is most convenient in the moment.

GAME OF THRONES SPOILER ALERT

So it's with interest that I wonder where Game of Thrones is going with the Arya plot line. The quick summary is that she is a noble born girl hell bent on revenge for the death of her parents. She's become an accomplished killer, but has also gotten caught up in this sort of cult in which she is being asked to become "no one" -- to leave her old identity behind and instead have the capability of wearing any number of masks and appearing like any number of different people, a lethal assassin. Repeatedly she is asked what her name is, and repeatedly she must answer "a girl has no name" as part of her further depersonalization.

In the books, regarding Arya it says "She could feel the hole inside of her where her heart had been" and "She would be no one if that is what it took. No one had no holes inside of her."

This video explains the psychological changes she undergoes, and how she can hardly function like a person because she cannot trust, all she knows is killing and survival.

BPD + ASPD = perfect match?

This has been mentioned briefly before, but I liked this recent comment for why borderline personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder often go together like peanut butter and jam:

One takes nothing personally, the other takes everything personally.
Psychopathic detachment can diffuse Borderline reactive rage; Borderline extreme emotion can be sufficiently 'loud' to penetrate psychopathic flattened affect; the non-judgmental approach of a psychopath can counter the black/white thinking of a Borderline, in the 'quiet' times when they're receptive to logic. The self-confident psychopath won't care about any Borderline accusations or insults.

Psychopaths [no fear] aren't bothered about the 'walking on eggshells' aspect of Borderline. And Borderlines usually appreciate the optimism and drive of the psychopath.

The only downside is the abandonment issues of the Borderline, since the psychopath....abandons, eventually. Although if the borderline is 'stabilised' by that point - they usually breathe a sigh of relief as they wave goodbye

Tylenol = other people's painkiller

Researcher's at Ohio State University found that using at least one type of over the counter painkiller decreases your assessment of other people's pain:

When you take acetaminophen to reduce your pain, you may also be decreasing your empathy for both the physical and social aches that other people experience, a new study suggests.

Researchers at The Ohio State University found, for example, that when participants who took acetaminophen learned about the misfortunes of others, they thought these individuals experienced less pain and suffering, when compared to those who took no painkiller.

“These findings suggest other people’s pain doesn’t seem as big of a deal to you when you’ve taken acetaminophen,” said Dominik Mischkowski, co-author of the study and a former Ph.D. student at Ohio State, now at the National Institutes of Health.
***
In an earlier study, Way and other colleagues found that acetaminophen also blunts positive emotions like joy.
***
While these results had not been seen before, they make sense in the light of previous research, Way said.

A 2004 study scanned the brains of people as they were experiencing pain and while they were imagining other people feeling the same pain. Those results showed that the same part of the brain was activated in both cases.

“In light of those results, it is understandable why using Tylenol to reduce your pain may also reduce your ability to feel other people’s pain as well,” he said.

The researchers are continuing to study how acetaminophen may affect people’s emotions and behavior, Way said. They are also beginning to study another common pain reliever – ibuprofen – to see if it has similar results.

This makes sense to me. I feel like I identify more with people and experience a stronger, more compelling cognitive empathy for people undergoing something that I can relate to. Because I haven't traditionally felt or acknowledge my feelings, is that why my empathy is so underdeveloped? I.e., does your experience feeling or having felt a particular thing directly relate to your ability to empathize? Is part of empathy just an emotional memory you're experiencing or a projection of our own current mental states on those of others?

Against Empathy

I think I tweeted this, but it is worth its own post. Paul Bloom explains in this video for the Atlantic how empathy is a bad thing:



I didn't tweet this link to the "Notes" section of the Atlantic related to this, featuring a commenter's assertion re sociopaths:

Empathy is what allows us to navigate day by day. A human without empathy is a sociopath or a robot. The way empathy is discussed in the video is so flawed by mixing it with altruism, which is very different than empathy but is more closely aligned to the charity model discussed. And do not kid yourself: Altruism is a “what’s in it for me,” while empathy drives connections towards others.

The comments are also predictably outraged. 

Power for the sake of power?

From a sociopathic identifying reader on what's the point of it all:

I have been a frequent reader of the sociopath world blog and for a long time it has helped me to organize my own thoughts but... I feel that there is a problem that I simply cannot tackle. For years I've had a bloated sense of ego, I suppose. I mean, my successes, however insignificant they may appear to others, are very important to me to a point that I am constantly boastful of them. It's not just minor things like winning a game or getting that oh so important promotion at work. Those things are minuscule at best to me. I'm talking about a span of a few years where I went head to head with, who I now believe, to be a fellow sociopath.

At the time I was not aware of my mental state. Sure, I did know I was different but to what extent I neither understood why or cared to find out. It was during this time that I met him. We started off as good friends and with time that friendship devolved as I watched him take advantage of his friends. He eventually hurt someone I considered to be a sibling to me. Really... I looking back I don't think I confronted him because I cared about her. I think I was just looking for a fight. I confronted him despite his friends chiming in, trying to ridicule me. I remember vividly being unconcerned about them... They didn't matter to me. I came for a reason and it certainly didn't involve any of them. That's when I picked up on his constant lying.

I recall going out of my way to be everything he wasn't. I wanted to prove that he was evil and that by some arbitrary reasoning I instead was good. If he was going to lie to his friends, I would focus on blunt honesty. If he was going to throw his friends away, I was going to be loyal. The one thing I couldn't simply throw away was manipulation. He and I both did that... and though I showed these traits of honesty and loyalty, they were driven by an honor code that I would simply cast aside if it failed to benefit me.

I can already tell that at this point I'm rambling like a mad man but my history with him brings that out in me. Which leads to the problem... After about a year into our rivalry I was diagnosed with ASPD. At the time it was something I resented... "There was noting wrong with me." I thought. To be labeled by such an ugly term such as sociopath didn't, at the time, benefit me at any capacity. I went on acting as I had before without dwelling on it much. After all, I was already occupied with trying to be two steps ahead of the guy plotting two steps ahead of me at all times. I knew this... I knew I had to be able to adapt. To take whatever he threw at me and toss it back. Something that he never quite managed to do himself. There was a sort of mutual respect that he and I shared despite displaying ourselves as hating one another. I remember having an intense reaction to him at even his mention but it was fleeting and could not be maintained no matter how hard I tried. I wanted to cling to this feeling. I'm not sure if it was hate or adrenaline... but I was addicted. It just couldn't last, I'm afraid. I remember purposefully coming up with bandaid solutions for the stuff he would stir up. Prolonging our fighting just so that I could plan the next of our battles. Unfortunately, I had to put an end to it for good so I planted seeds all around me. Suggested that he was evil and that those who would side with me would be "safe". Needless to say, the ones he had wronged easily turned. Before long I had amassed a powerful enough army to take him down. Disgraced, he fled... but after that I've lost all of my motivation.

I've ignited smaller wars over the years but not one person has ever been the challenge that he was. Then there was no one left to fight at all... I feel like I've been wasting my potential but when I chase those feelings of fulfillment and power I promptly lose interest. I've tried looking for enemies but it turns out when you're actively searching for a fight you only find losers. I've tried making friends thinking that I'd find acceptance or something of substance to distract me but I find myself incapable of maintaining them. I lose interest in people just so easily now that I don't know if I have any worthwhile friendships to hold onto. I even once tried to start a cult but my lack of motivation struck and it fell apart within a couple of days.

I'm afraid that I'm losing my touch and I don't know where to turn to gain the motivation I need to do anything. I thought it was depression but don't you have to feel sad when you're depressed? If that's the case I really don't think I could manage being that for as long as I have. If I have to sum up the way I feel in tangible words for me, it would be boredom. I'm bored. I put so much focus on what I was doing back then that I cannot take my mind off of it. I am stuck on what was rather than what is and instead of chasing something of substance I gain momentary ego trips when I reminisce on something that's long gone. I honestly don't know what to do and that bothers me.

M.E.:

Yeah, I think you might be bored because there's no real meaning in cultivating power. It's engaging while it lasts, but ultimately it is no longer compelling to us. Perhaps we mature or perhaps we grow in wisdom, but we can suddenly see more clearly that there's not really any point to it. But what else will occupy our mile a minute thoughts? What other projects can engage us with such captivation? This, I believe, is the almost universal problem of the maturing sociopath.

Also, I should say, as a descriptive matter it is absolutely true that sociopaths behave in a way that indicates that there is pleasure in cultivating power for its own sake (i.e. the pleasure of ruining someone is not about the ruining but about an expression of power). It's only as a prescriptive matter that I suggest to sociopaths that the pleasure from cultivating power may not continue to be enough to get you out of bed in the morning, the older you get.

Quote: Reputation

“With enough courage, you can do without a reputation.”

Rhett Butler to Scarlet O'Hara

Integrity

Along the same lines as the last post, from Eleanor Roosevelt, via Brain Pickings:

We need imagination and integrity, courage and a high heart. We need to fan the spark of conviction, which may again inspire the world as we did with our new idea of the dignity and the worth of free men. But first we must learn to cast out fear. People who “view with alarm” never build anything
***
It is becoming increasingly difficult for the individual to remember that he is himself a unique human being, and that unless he keeps the sharp edges of his personality and the hard core of his integrity intact he will have lost not only all that makes him valuable to himself but all that makes him of value to anyone or anything else.
***
Look around you at the major improvements in your life, in your world. Each of them grew out of an individual conviction and an individual ability to act upon that conviction.

Christianity has a concept of the body of Christ, and each member with its own distinct and essential function:

12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.

 13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

 14 For the body is not one member, but many.

 15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

 16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

 17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?

 18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.

 19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?

 20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.

 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.

 22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:

 23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.

 24 For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked:

 25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.

 26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.

Some people are obviously the liver and the anus of the body of Christ, but the suggestion is that they are no less worthy or honorable than any other part. Do Christians really believe this about their fellow men?

Fulfilling the measure of your creation?

I was recently at this pep talk directed partly at teenagers. The motivational speaker was talking about how everyone should always be theirselves, show up as themselves, make sure that no matter what else they do in life they be true to themselves and don't allow anything to come in the way of that. There was a noticeable discomfort from their teachers at this point. The teachers apparently didn't want the students to be themselves. In reaction, the speaker added a little caveat, "within the appropriate boundaries of the situation". And that makes sense, I guess, if you think about it. Being yourself at someone else's wedding might be a little bit more subdued than being yourself at your own, for instance.

But I do think it's safe to say that there is a lot of pressure on people to be something other than what they are. If society hasn't figured out a way yet to benefit pretty directly from what you have to offer, they're not so interested in you being yourself. Of course, we have scores of examples of geniuses, artistic and otherwise, whose true selves and true thoughts were rejected, whose social sphere pressured them to mightily conform, but they were such forces of nature that they never did. And we get to reap the benefit of that failure.

But we still love to preach the doctrine of conformity. When teenagers saying that they are going to be an artist and don't need college, or an entrepreneur and don't need college, etc., many will still attempt to interfere in that person's life in an attempt to dissuade them from pursuing their dreams/passion/drive.

Similarly, even from many people who seem a little more open-minded about sociopathic identifying individuals still an inherent, there is often a trailing "but" or "as long as they behave". Like the mixed messages given to children and young adults, the true message being preached is that society has no real desire to accommodate or adapt to you, you must accommodate or adapt to the majority or suffer consequences.

But I want you to think, you normal people, how toxic it is to your soul when someone, some situation, or some institution has denied you authentic self expression. How terrible is it to you to not be able to be yourself? Also, think about how pressure to conform unnaturally is likely what leads child sociopaths to develop in such grotesque ways.

Famous runner Eric Liddell (of Chariots of Fire fame) famously said "I believe God made me for a purpose, but he also made me fast! And when I run I feel his pleasure." Mormons have a similar concept, that every living thing is to fulfill the measure of its creation -- the lions are meant to predate as much as the lambs are to graze. How can it be that some people get to live an authentic and purposeful life filled with meaningful self expression, except sociopaths? Maybe for those proposing solutions to the so-called "sociopath problem," ask yourselves what you're really demanding of sociopaths and ask yourselves whether you would be fine with those terms if the roles were reversed.