With the release of the Mask of Sanity in the 1940s Dr. Hervey Cleckley began the quest to describe a syndrome called psychopathy, in which affected individuals prey on others without remorse. Since people affected by the syndrome are socially disordered the syndrome has also been called sociopathy. Dr. Robert Hare extended the work of Cleckley and carefully documented the symptoms of the disorder. All this research has lead to two basic conclusions:
1. It is quite remarkable that individuals who choose a lifestyle of remorseless predation of other people are so similar in their behaviors and personality traits.
2. Equally important is the idea that non-disordered people do not “regularly” prey on others.
These two very profound conclusions have been the cause of a dilemma that is outlined by the following statement by a prominent psychopathy researcher:
Clearly, not all people who are violent or callous or sadistic are psychopathic. In fact, it is probably the case that most of the cruelty in the world is not perpetrated by psychopathic individuals. Similarly, although psychopaths commit a disproportionate share of the violent crime, it seems to me that they do not commit even the majority of the violent crime.
Over the last two weeks I have thought about the above dilemma, particularly since attending the Battered Mothers Custody Conference. The dilemma was also discussed at the conference in the form of questioning whether “all batters are psychopaths/sociopaths.” I want to answer this question for you in and extend the answer to the broader context of psychopathy/sociopathy and humanity.
All though I have the utmost respect for the quoted psychopathy researcher, I disagree strongly with his views. I believe that ALL people who are violent, callous or sadistic (in the sense that these traits persist in them) are psychopathic.
Over the last 7 years a number of studies show that the group of traits and behaviors that group together in psychopathy act like a “dimensional trait.” By dimensional trait I mean that psychopathy is similar to height. Just as there are short people and tall people and also what we consider short and tall changes according to age, gender and geography, there are people who are more or less psychopathic. The dilemma only happens when we attempt to categorize a person and call him or her “a psychopath/sociopath.” Scientists and mental health professionals disagree about where to draw the dividing line to indicate “a psychopath,” just like you and I might disagree as to what height makes for a “tall person.”
The dimension, psychopathic is also different from height in a very important respect- that is stability. Whereas height is very stable, psychopathy is only relatively stable and is affected by aging, mood disorders, substance abuse and social environment.
Now I want to explain the source of the confusion around the dimension psychopathic. The source of the confusion is a failure to understand that one issue underlies psychopathy and is the cause of the observed fact that a group of traits and behaviors cluster together in psychopathy/sociopathy.
The cause of psychopathy/sociopathy is an addiction to power. The addiction to power can start at any age but as in most addictions it usually begins by the early 20s. Also like other addictions, the earlier a person becomes addicted to power, the worse the addiction. Addictions that begin early are very resistant to treatment and carry a very poor prognosis. Psychopathy/sociopathy that starts prior to age 10 (puberty) is the most devastating.
The idea that an addiction to power underlies psychopathy/sociopathy has important micro and macro implications for human society. On a micro level the family is affected by psychopathic individuals who are obsessed with the pursuit of interpersonal power at the expense of family members. Violence, callous manipulation and sadism are all part of that power fix. The person that abuses family members does so because it makes him or her feel powerful. That is true whether the abuser is mother, father, brother, sister or any other relation.
The macro level is just as important. Our institutional leaders, if addicted to power produce widespread abuse in our society. Institutional leaders are bosses, politicians, teachers and the like. When we examine risk for “psychopathy” in leaders, it is useful to consider the phenomenon of addiction as applied to power.
Last night we went to The Cheesecake Factory to celebrate my daughter’s 18th birthday. I had one frozen mango marguerita, likely one of six I will have in all of 2009. I will also likely drink 4 glasses of wine and about three beers all year. There are many people who cannot drink just one drink because the pleasure of alcohol sets off a chemical reaction in their brains. Once they have one drink they develop a compulsion to keep drinking.
Power with me works the same way. I dislike telling other people what to do. I have had to learn to manage this dislike in order to adequately mother my children. Good parenting requires the thoughtful, careful exertion of interpersonal power. Some parents become addicted to that power and become what are called “authoritarian parents.” They are so bossy and dictatorial their poor children never learn to think for themselves.
Institutional leaders are like parents. Leadership requires thoughtful, careful exertion of interpersonal power. For a psychopathic, power-addict the first time they lead the meeting fills them with pleasure and delight. They become obsessed with the feeling and so obsessed with power. Since love and power motives are mutually exclusive, eventually power consumes the person’s entire being and he/she develops all the qualities of “a psychopath.”
Let us look at domestic violence again. Men and women who abuse their partners mentally, emotionally sexually and physically are not normal people who are the subjects of the influence of a violent society. They are power addicts. Just like there are societal factors in alcoholism, gambling and other addictions, there are societal influences on psychopathy. These societal influences no more cause psychopathy or power addiction, than they do alcoholism. Drinking causes alcoholism and exerting power causes psychopathy- in people with an inborn predisposition.
Please comment on what I have written. If you disagree please state your reasons. Let’s have a debate.
Great post, Oxy…. I often think about that aspect too, like how Hitler, Stalin, Brigham Young ( the Mormon “prophet” who ordered the Mountain Meadows Massacre) etc. are just more “successful” at gaining the power to do more harm than just your average S/P who “only” hurts his family and friends…
Bravo once again OXY. Grant I extend a warm welcome and appreciate your thoughtful posts.
Oxy the prey and predator relationship with a PSN also perhaps explains why so many women fall victim to the male P’s. We are the gatherer, nurturers, traditionally and culturally conditioned, while the men we look up to are often the successful hunters. Goes way way back. In the early stage they pretend to hunt for us,but we all know what happens next.
I find it alarming and sad that so very many admire the antics of the P’s such a Madoff until it is too late. He was heavily protected by many in positions of authority that should have known better.
It seems in the last few decades we have become a society that openly endorses the P mentality of winner take all,” Survivor” mentality and champion greed in a cult like fashion, with the mantra of trickle down, rising tide nonsense to make it all more palitable.
I made the fatal (almost) error of believing there was a line, a distinction between the business life and the personal values of my ex and other P’s in business, and of course it was presented thus. It took a very long time to realize that they don’t leave it at the office.
I fear that we have institutionalized P behavior in our economic and political system and continue to reward the most greedy with more. Look at the bailout and weep.
No hope of screening for and somehow warning against the P’s among us as long as they hold the reigns of power. That I think is where a large concentration of successful P’s can be found.
As for singling them out in such way, of course that smacks of the yellow arm band mentality, and would be impossible to administer ( I know you were tongue in cheek, Oxy)
This discussion reminds me of a long ago trip to Greece, where on the islands I soon learned that the locals had a very effective way of keeping their crime rate down to practically zero. EVERYONE knew EVERYBODY and any infraction of the social order went through the grapevine in hours. The individual would be shamed or shunned.
I don’t know if I would want to live that way, but a person could sleep on the beach unmolested, and walk late at night unafraid.
With the rampant corruption we see everywhere it seems the P’s have won the day and are in full control and power.
Those of us with values and principals that temper our wants and ambitions are surely seen as quaint, artifacts of an earlier time. Before the “market” became God, before we had a secretary of state declare that 500,000 Iraqi childrens deaths was ‘worth the price”, before the beleaguered public was forced to reward speculators excesses and failures.
The big picture is somewhat like the end of my marriage, from my viewpoint. I knew I was on a fast moving train with a crazy conductor, who kept running us off the rails. It took a long time to realize that I could, in fact get off the train. Alone and with almost nothing, but off the f*&&^%$ing train.
I think the term sociopath and psychopath is overused. Overused by some people to the extent that so many people could be termed apd, sociopathic, or psychopathic by their loose criteria that the percentages of “them” would be so high in comparison to the “norms” (us) that it flips to them being what is considered the NORM of society and we are the minority. Take a look at this:
Donald M. Black, author of Bad Boys, Bad Men: Confronting Antisocial Personality Disorder, says isolated behavior that defies the rules of society is very common n the general population, that many of us flout the rules at some point in our lives. In an ECA study:
30% of the men surveyed in St. Louis admitted four or more moving traffic violations, 18% of the men admitted infidelity in their marriages in three or more affairs, and 8% admitted to engaging in illegal activity such as drug dealing or other illegal work related activities.
In a Baltimore study, 34% of those surveyed had a history of some type of antisocial behavior from time to time.
Black says that at least 1/4 to 1/3 of the population has engaged in some degree of antisocial activities, although they don’t have the degree of severity and varied symptoms required for a diagnosis of ASPD.
Recent studies show that 45-55% of married women and 50-60% of married men have extramarital sex at some point in their marital relationship. (Atwood & Schwartz, 2002, Journal of Couple and Relationship Therapy). Therefore, the vast majority of people committing infidelity are not psychopaths, yet they are engaging in a good many traits listed on the PCL-R while engaging in the affair. However, their behavior is specific to the situation, and does not carry over into other areas of their lives.
I think there HAS to be strict criteria requiring severe behavior and personality traits that are steadily consistent and that are displayed across the board in other areas of their lives too (besides just say abusing the wife at home, whereas they may be a pussycat in business and everywhere else and may not abuse power at all in other areas).
Otherwise you could easily half over half the population defined as apd, sociopathic, or psychopathic using loose criteria. *please hold the tomatos most of you probably want to throw at me). 🙂
Dear Jen,
Don’t worry, you’re out of tomato range! I pulled up my tomato plants months ago! 🙂
Having been on the earth a few years, and being old enough to remember a viewmaster (K. Hawks’s post), I would not hesitate to say we are the minority! If the word sociopath/psychopath seems too strong for the average schmuck who is only abusing his wife, then how about the term dirt bag?
A comment below on the following………..”(besides just say abusing the wife at home, whereas they may be a pussycat in business and everywhere else and may not abuse power at all in other areas).
If a man is abusing his wife at home and being a pussycat at work (which I doubt), the pussycat side is part of the deceptive behavior and being used to mask the dark side. Wasn’t the BTK killer a church deacon? How many deacons are in jail? You are describing Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde which is an aspect of abusive men many women know all too well. Mr. Black’s idea that this is just not “bad” enough is appalling to me.
I do think people can make a mistake that is out of character for them and in that sense I might agree with you. A non-ASPD though is usually very uncomfortable doing somehthing that would qualify as anti-social behavior. Heck, they even put their carts in the cart corral at Wal- Mart instead of pushing it into someone’s beautiful new SUV! I think when a pattern is clear,… abuser, aggressive driver, affairs, illegal work related activities, all of it, they are card-carrying N/S/Ps in my book and I think society makes a big mistake not to call the behavior wha tit is!
EyeoftheStorm: Society blames the whistle blower(s) who calls attention to the psychopath/sociopath/N … the bad guy… and then the whistle blowers’ reputation, career, livelihood is systematically destroyed while others benefit and thrive off the whistle blower’s plight.
End of story.
To clarify: “—”..”(besides just say abusing the wife at home, whereas they may be a pussycat in business and everywhere else and may not abuse power at all in other areas”……..the preceeding remark about DV was not Blacks, but my own comment. No doubt there is something “wrong” personality wise with a domestic abuser, but I am saying it may not necessarily be sociopathy or psychopathy. I think it was in one of Hare’s books that it was said 1 out of 5 persistent domestic abusers is thought to be psychopathic. I would assume from that, the other 4 out of 5 have some other disorder or personality flaw contributing to the domestic abuse. But anyways, domestic abuse was just one example, but you could apply the same thing to theft or rape or murder. Are ALL people who commit theft or rape or murder sociopaths or psychopaths. Not according to the “experts” who study psychopaths.
My only point was that all bad behavior is not necessarily due to a person being sociopathic or psychopathic, but could be due to them having the “traits” but not to the extent they qualify for the diagnosis OR they may have some other disorder or mental illness altogether. But regardless of what it is, YES it is still bad behavior and you’d likely wanna avoid the person. I just think the term psychopath in particular is way over used and its overuse waters down the seriousness of the disorder.
Wini: The psychopath is very good at charming those around him (society, as you put it) so that the group lays the blame on the whistleblower, not on the predatory perpetrator. It’s all so classic.
And since I am playing devils advocate at the moment, although I have the utmost respect for the mental health professionals opinions, alot of opinions do vary in the field. I, personally, give more weight to the mental health professionals opinons who are the researchers who have actually spent time studying and researching actual psychopaths. And seems like I read (probably on here or in an article link posted here) that some researchers have not actually MET and spent time with psychopaths, even though they research them.
SO, I would carry it a step further and say I give the MOST weight to the opinions of the researchers who have actually spent TIME with a NUMEROUS VARIETY of psychopaths themselves and then studied them. Experts like Hare for example and also that guy who is doing the MRI’s on psychopaths in prisons.
I hate to sound narcissistic myself (but I will since i’m being devil at the moment anyhow), but I think the mental health professionals who haven’t really treated or done any up close and personal work with psychopaths, or have maybe only met one or two in their entire lifetime of practice, and have gotten most of their knowledge from just reading the occasional book about them, aren’t really much better equipped than I am to form an opinon about the psychopath.
And since I consider myself actually pretty ill equipped to form an opinon as to whether a person is or is not a psychopath, I figure I will leave it up to someone like HARE who has spent so much time studying them. I figure he has that strict PCL-R criteria and that 222 page instruction book complete with examples, and wants mental health professionals to be properly trained in using the PCL-R for a REASON. And I figure that reason is because he knows the disorder is a SERIOUS one that alot of folks will tend to overdiagnose without proper training.
Jen, you might take your thoughts over to Steve Becker’s column, where the devils and angels have been lining up on these issues!
Meanwhile, I’ll also note that much of the research on psychopaths has been done on psychopaths in captivity, as opposed to psychopaths “in the wild.” Those of us who have found our way here are the unsung “researchers” of these creatures as they appear in their native habitat.
I feel that those with the most informed opinions are those who both understand the classic research and who have been “bitten” by the real deal that ambushed them in real life.
Well, Rune, on the Becker column, I can’t decide which “side” I wanna be on! lol Also, I agree with you on what you said above. That is why I figure my opinon is about as good as most mental health professionals on the subject, especially those who have not studied the psychopaths up close and in person LIVE, IN or OUT of captivity. 🙂 I also think that although a therapist could weigh in a “opinion” about whether we were probably involved with a socio or psychopath, that since we lived it and have the ins/outs of everyday actions with the person, that after we read several well informed books on the subject, that we can probably call it about as good as a therapist could who has never even met the person in question. Yeah, we might call it wrong, but hey, they might call it wrong, too.
I think therapist are good for healing and trauma related issues WE are suffering from regardless of the reason, but not necessarily that good at validating whether we were or were not with a s or p cause all they can really do is give an “opinion” based on info WE give them, since they don’t have the person there to evaluate. (not to mention alot of therapist aren’t properly trained to evaluate P’s or S’s anyhow).