This past week I was talking on the telephone with my student and research assistant when he was mugged by a group of 5-7 thugs. One hit him from behind, knocking him down and another punched him in the abdomen. Ironically, among the items stolen was a copy of “Without Conscience” by Robert Hare.
Yesterday, my student asked me, “Those guys in the group who do have empathy and guilt, how do they feel about doing this? What makes them do it?” To which I replied, “I don’t think they feel a thing. They are likely all psychopathic (sociopaths). No one wants to admit just how many of them there are. So they draw an artificial line based on the PCL-R (a psychopathy test) and say these thugs are psychopaths and these thugs are non-psychopaths. They call them non-psychopaths even though their scores on the test are far from normal. They do this because they want to hold on to hope that most of them can change.”
Dr. Reid Melloy, a forensic psychologist with years of experience working with criminals has a method of classifying them that I think is more correct. He has four groups, not two, based on the PCL-R, non-psychopaths, and mild, moderate and severe psychopathy. I do concede that the thugs that assaulted my student likely had the syndrome to varying degrees; and we know the ring leader is likely severely affected.
That gets me to a recent article that received a great deal of news coverage. In one Fox News article were comments from experts who in the past I have criticized for irresponsible public comments. The article discusses data from a study published in a top journal, it doesn’t give the title but it is, The Antisocial Brain: Psychopathy Matters a Structural MRI Investigation of Antisocial Male Violent Offenders.
The title should say, “the degree of psychopathy matters”. When you see stories like this you have to watch out because my colleagues have rotating definitions of psychopathy that they pull out depending on what they need to fit their data. In some studies like this one, they use a cut-off high PCL-R score. In other studies they separate offenders into groups depending on whether or not they show empathy and remorse. So groups may contain the same PCL-R score but be defined in terms of differing symptoms.
The study basically showed that higher scores on the PCL-R are associated with a higher likelihood of finding a shrunken “emotional brain”. Before you go writing me asking that your ex be forced to undergo an MRI which will prove the presence of psychopathy, let me tell you what is not in the news article. You cannot use an MRI scan to diagnose psychopathy.
A diagnostic test has to be sensitive, meaning that it picks up your ex and everyone else with the condition. Well we already know that there is mild, moderate and severe. So do we want the test to pick up the mild or the severe group? That will depend on what your ex actually scored on the PCL-R. I am sure that a “mild” case of psychopathy, does not make for a good life partner. That is why for the purposes of Love Fraud any comparison between “ASPD” and psychopathy is meaningless.
A diagnostic test also has to be specific meaning that only psychopaths show the abnormality. There is no test for psychopathy that is sensitive and specific enough to be useful. This article only shows us the obvious, that very high levels of psychopathy are more likely to be related to observable changes in the brain than are lower levels of psychopathy.
Since the brain produces behavior, their brains have to be different. The behavior they produce is different. All of the thugs who attacked my student to steal “without conscience” have something wrong with their brains.
Sky,
I lived in Norway for four years. I’ve been following the Anders Breivik matter in the Norwegian newspapers.
That one psych evaluation that Baron-Cohen wrote about was trashed by most of the Norwegian mental health experts. He (Breivik) was not exhibiting paranoia schiozophrenia. If you read what was reported in Norwegian, the Norwegian experts faulted the evaluation on a number of levels. There were Norwegian experts already saying that Breivik was a P.
It was very irresponsible for Baron-Cohen to have written what he did.
As for the Norwegian newspaper that contacted him for a quote, I’ve never heard of it. It could have had a circulation of 10 for all I know. Whatever it was, it wasn’t one of the major newspapers in Norway.
Grace,
You must be reading a different link than the one I posted.
Baron- Cohen did NOT say Breivik was schizophrenic. He said that some psychologists had evaluated him to be that, but then he goes on to say, that it made little sense considering the very LUCID manifesto.
You can go NC with your mom and sister, but the P’s in charge of your government are still out there. They start wars they poison our environment, NC won’t stop them.
As far as LF being the only community of people who know a P when they see one HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
We have P’s on here all the time and everyone is shocked to find out that they were later on.
Sometimes only a few of us in the community find out. Since I’ve been here, I’ve seen at least 6 that only a few knew about. Of course I won’t slander anybody because I’m not a psychologist, but these people dropped their masks and disappeared.
Truth is, it’s very difficult to spot a P in the wild. Not because the clues aren’t there, but because we are still in denial most of the time. We don’t want to suspect everyone who behaves erratically. We wonder if it’s PTSD etc…
But anyway, I will reiterate my point: you can’t protect yourself from what you don’t understand.
Liane, thank you so much for this article. What I find so interesting about the “psych-speak” is that it (along with all other “professional” languages) often befuddles the layman – the anacronyms and behavioral references zoom over the heads of individuals who are not a member of the club. I don’t use that terminology, nor do I “know” about tests, studies, etc. What I “do” know is that your insight is spot-on, as far as I’m concerned. Sure, a whole-lifespan picture of one’s behavioral choices can help in assessments. It’s not only irresponsible to make arbitrary claims, but it’s arrogant. Nobody can (or, will EVER) come up with the litmus strip that turns fuscia when dipped in sociopath urine – it’s just not going to ever happen.
Skylar….”you can’t protect yourself from what you don’t understand,” is a pretty good point. For me, I don’t think that I’ll ever “understand” sociopathy or psychopathy. For me, it’s more important to familiarize myself with the symptoms and to stop living in denial that sociopathy simply “IS” and there’s no amount of understanding or research that’s going to alter that fact.
Brightest blessings to all….
About Breivik,
Remember that not all of the aspects of psychopathy that may be important are accounted for by Robert Hare’s list.
In my opinion “paranoia” falls into that category. Most published accounts of psychopaths describe an element of paranoia or suspiciousness. It doesn’t seem to take much for some to display paranoia to a degree that seems to cross the line into delusions.
Perhaps this will be added to the definition at some point.
Liane,
Good point! The ex-spath showed paranoia tendencies too. For me this followed from his projecting and not wanting people to know what was behind the mask. And it makes sense: if someone is devoid of affective empathy and full of envy and hatred for others, then it would be hard for the individual to suppose others not being governed by the same ultimate drive.
I wonder whether it also motivates them to make their victims accomplices in their amoral actions… it would be evidence for them that ultimately we are all amoral and evil, just like them.
I think the paranoia aspect should be taken into consideration as well.
I’ve seen my P sister come up with some very bizarre conclusions that are so off-the-wall to me that they sounded like they leaned to the paranoid side of things.
Sky, your point is the same as mine just worded differently – you cannot protect yourself from what you do not understand therefore, rather than holding out hope for changing a teeny number of Ps, wouldn’t humanity be better served with these behaviors being used to protect the bulk of humanity?
You said we are in denial. How about we’re just clueless and don’t know what we’re up against? That’s my position. The experts have failed to inform the general public. They’re too consumed with possibly saving one or two Ps from themselves.
The Norwegian articles that I read about Breivik pointed out that he was missing as substantial number of indicators of paranoid schizophrenia so they, although they covered themselves by saying that they did not have firsthand access to the patient and his records, based on what these clinicians did release about Breivik, they weren’t seeing the paranoid schizophrenia. For starters, he has never claimed to hear voices and yes, his writings are very lucid.
Breivik, from all the accounts that I have read, hasn’t come across as paranoid. He is narcissistic.
He’s angry. He feels entitled to the Norwegian way of life prior the recent influx of immigrants and he sees these immigrants taking that way of life away from him. That’s why he wanted to send a message.
He wants the immigrants out of Norway and he doesn’t care how that it achieved up to and including murder. He killed the kids on the island (who were attending a liberal political summer camp) because he thought the liberals in Norway were being too lenient by letting the immigrants into the country. The liberals added insult to injury by accommodating their needs, which diluted what he considered the Norwegian way of life.
He appointed himself Supreme Overlord (or something like that) of all of Norway because only he has the superior knowledge to know what is best for Norwegians and an acceptable way of life.
They also said that his mother was seeking help for him at a very young age (I forget exactly, I think it was about 5, 6, or 7) because she couldn’t handle his bizarre behaviors.
By the way, Breivik doesn’t want an insanity defense. He wants to be perceived as sane with a valid position. His defense attorney is not using an insanity defense.
Sky, I never said nor implied that LF was the only community that could recogize a P. I never came close to saying that. All I said was it was it was an enlightened community.
Perhaps I should have clarified “enlightened.” I meant that LF readers have a different (and more realistic) perspective about what constitutes a P. They know how prevalent they are and they know that a good number of them do not fit the Hollywood stereotype of easily recognizable scumbags who are serial rapists and murderers.
I haven’t been active on LF long enough to have any idea what you’re referring to about Ps being present here. I certainly wouln’t make a leap that just because somebody came to this site, they could easily identify a P or identify one at all. There is no way for me or anyone else to know who comes here. What is there to keep a P out?
Paranoia. That’s a very interesting subject. Paranoid personality disorder is definitely something I noticed in my spath and in every spath I’ve ever met.
I could not understand the need to be paranoid of ME! I am such a harmless person, who only loved and cared for him, so why did he tell me that I was capable of harming him and he needed to keep secrets because he suspected I might try to hurt him. Well, I figured it out at the end.
It’s because he had every intent of hurting ME and expected retaliation. So that’s the complication to attributing paranoia to a spath. It’s not paranoia if people really do want to hurt you, and spaths, having every intention of hurting others, are simply being PROACTIVE in their seemingly paranoid behavior!
It might be true that they actually HAVE paranoia, but how can you tell, when they have set themselves against all of humanity? Protecting yourself from your enemies is a practical step to take. If you intend to hurt others, it makes perfect sense to have an exit strategy.
Spaths only look paranoid until you understand what they are doing, what they have done and what they plan to do.
Edit: Despite the above examples, I still do think they are paranoid because they try everything they can to make us feel paranoid. The betrayal, when the mask comes off, is the ultimate attempt but there were so many before that.
He would come home with stories of people trying to hurt him, cops were set up to stop me for crossing the center line even though it hadn’t happened (right after he told me that cops would stop me for crossing the center line even if it hadn’t happened.) He was constantly pointing out the hazards in our lives and how people could so easily die. Then there was the government conspiracy theories of being spied on.
My BIL got a job setting up hi-tech cameras in his police department. He showed me that he could set one up across town and watch a window in a condo miles away. It was his way of showing me how much POWER he had, as a cop, and how he could see anything.
So the fact that they try to seed paranoia, DOES seem to point that they have paranoia they’re trying to slime us with. It’s just that, with spaths, nothing is ever straight forward.
Liane, Good article and I hear the frustration you must be feeling in your article.
I am reading a book about a high level political person who I think is a raging psychopath. This person (who shall be unnamed) had aspirations for the presidency in 2008 and they wrote a book about their life…literally reinventing themselves…presenting a false mask.
One of the things the author wrote was about the paranoid thinking of this person and comparing them to Nixon. Anyone who didn’t agree with them was an enemy, and therefore was subject to attack for perceived wrongs.
I think that paranoia to one level or another some very high and some less so is a definate criteria in psychopathy. Hitler was very paranoid, so was Mao, and many other highly psychopathic dictators.
My son Patrick, for example is quite paranoid. He assumes that anyone who is not for him, that does not think he is the smartest man on earth is out to get him, and therefore should be knocked out of his way. 20+ years in prison have made him more paranoid as well….I imagine with good reason. In a visiting room on a contact visit he cannot make eye contact, but instead is constantly moving his eyes to watch the room. Only in a case of a non-contact visit where he is locked in a glass telephone booth type arrangement where he is secure from all unexpected attacks can he make eye contact with his visitor.
I see the paranoia in my spath, but not in the “N”s that I know. I wonder if paranoia is a point of differentiation between the two?
My spath was extremely paranoid. He stockpiled massive food and water for, when, you know, the bomb hit. Seriously. Locked up his piece of shit house and alarmed it.
I think while a “N” is terribly selfish, a sociopath knows that he can’t be trusted, and therefore trusts nobody. And therein sets the paranoia. They’ve probably also been backspathed a few times in their lives by victims, so they have good reason to be afraid.
Athena
callmeathena: you said: “..And therein sets the paranoia. They’ve probably also been backspathed a few times in their lives by victims, so they have good reason to be afraid.”
Isn’t THAT the truth? Hm? That remark made me smile….
And then it just keeps perpetuating itself in them.
If they weren’t so ugly they wouldn’t have reason to be paranoid, now, would they? Hm? That is THEIR CHOICE, the way I see it.
Dupey