Lessons from Jurassic Park: Sociopaths simply are

Editor’s note: The following article was written by the Lovefraud reader who posts as “Adelade.” She previously wrote “12 steps of recovery from love fraud.”

I very much enjoy reading, especially those fictitious works that cause me to think and learn. Without a doubt, nearly everyone has seen the movie, Jurassic Park, based upon a book that was written by Michael Crichton over 20 years ago. Well, I re-read the book over the long Memorial Day weekend. It is far, far different from the movie, and drives home the ramifications of the human myth of “control.” If you haven’t read the book, I would urge you to do so, simply because it speaks to a part of the human condition that is inherent in each of us: the need for control.

In reading Jurassic Park, the character of Dr. Ian Malcolm is a naysayer with regard to the Park’s subject matter, from the first page. Malcolm espouses “Chaos Theory” and seems beyond arrogant. As the story unfolds, the reader eventually rejects the perception that Malcolm is just an arrogant ass and realizes that he’s just speaking truthfully.

Well, that’s all very interesting (yawn) and zippety-doo-dah, what does any of that have to do with surviving sociopathy? Okay ”¦ hang with me for a second. Where I am concerned, many of the discussions in this book caused a personal epiphany.

Knowledge vs. control

Malcolm goes on to discuss how science has only focused upon “control” as the driving forces behind scientific discoveries. If something can be scientifically proven (or, discovered), human beings have been under the false assumption that we will have the ability to control whatever it is, whether it’s nuclear physics or human behavior. Knowledge about something does not signify control over something. This is where the fallacy of science vs. life is exposed, and that simple truth rocked my world.

The arrogance of science is very clear: there are many diseases, disorders, and deformities that cannot be altered even if science can explain what they are or why they occur. Genetic research has been in full swing for nearly 80 years and the one thing that has been proven through generations of hybridization and engineering is that anomalies will randomly occur regardless of how a genome is tweaked. This is an inevitability – when a string of DNA is hybridized or altered, it is impossible to weed out defects and anomalies, even if the geneticist believes that he/she has taken every possible variable into account. Nature has the final say in all things, period.

Sociopaths are what they are

So, once again, what does all of this gibberish and ranting have to do with surviving sociopath entanglements? It means just this: defining sociopathy/psychopathy, pigeonholing assessments, and all of the psych-speak in every human language will not alter the fact that sociopaths simply “are.” Regardless of the label, the acronym, the bell curve, the paradigm, or the nodding of educated heads and “harrumphing” in unison, what is not going to change is the fact that sociopaths are what they are, do what they do, and will always remain a factor of the human condition.

Without a doubt, this is the singular truth with regard to our survival, recovery, and emergence: We don’t really need to understand sociopathy. We don’t need to define whether it’s “nature vs. nurture.” We don’t need to construct parameters for an individual to be stuffed into. No amount of data is going to prevent sociopath and psychopath developments ever. What we “need” is to alter our own choices, behaviors, and perceptions and adapt so that we won’t be easy targets, again. What we “need,” more than anything, is to accept our human limitations with respect to “control,” and adapt.

Plants and animals have adapted to develop numerous strategies with regard to defense, propagation, and survival. Unfortunately (or not), human beings have come to the point in their perceptions that all we need is to “control” everything on earth from cellular mitosis to comet trajectories, and that Science and “The Experts” can accomplish this. And, this just isn’t so. We cannot stop earthquakes, though we can attempt to predict them. We cannot control where/when tornadoes will develop, though we can observe Doppler radar and blare out klaxon warnings if data suggests a threat. We cannot control whether an expensive show-quality heifer will produce a conjoined calf or not, but we can conduct amniocentesis in an attempt to intervene. We cannot control whether a human being is born as (or, develops into) a sociopath or not, but we attempt to construct parameters so as to avoid those who fit the profile.

We can adapt

What we can do is adapt. If our system of beliefs is flawed, we can change them. If our perceptions about human nature are flawed, we can alter them. If we leave ourselves open to repeated targeting and victimization, we can alter those things that make us attractive to sociopaths. We have the capacity to adapt, to heal, to emerge, and to progress. Now, I’m not saying that adaptation is smooth, painless, or instantaneous. Adaptation requires time ”¦ good, long time. Mistakes must be made along the way in order to develop “permanent” personal changes that are beneficial. The work that goes into adaptation is going to be intense, challenging, and demanding.

I’m taking this and I’m running with it as if my backside is on fire. I don’t need anyone in any professional capacity to tell me what I need to understand in the false assumption that “understanding will bring healing.” For me, that assumption is pure rubbish and simply not true. My healing, and the desire to heal, must come from within me, alone. No pill, no suggestion, no philosophy, no data, no acronym, and no religious ritual is going to cause me to adapt sufficiently enough to make myself safer from future victimization. So, I’m going to prioritize my “emotional hybridization,” and begin the long, slow processes of healing and emerging. I’m making the choice to accept this emergence as it is: a necessity of survival, on every level.