I plan to review for you a very recent paper: Psychopathy as a disorder of the moral brain. Dr. Robert Hare is one of the authors. But, before I can get to explaining the moral brain part, I have to get past the first paragraph, so the moral brain will be have to be discussed more next week. As I sat down to translate this paper into plain English, I got stuck at the fourth sentence:
“Antisocial behavior by itself is a nonspecific symptom common to many conditions, so psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD, American Psychiatric Association, 1994) are not analogous constructs while most cases of ASPD (sociopathy) do not fulfill the interpersonal and affective criteria for psychopathy (Hare, 2003; Ogloff, 2006) the behavioral features observed in these individuals are best explained by their level of psychopathy (Forth et al., 1996).”
O.K. let me get this straight, psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder are not the same thing so a sociopath is not a psychopath BUT to the extent that a sociopath is a sociopath, it is because he/she is a psychopath! Now, how are we supposed to understand that so we can start discussing the important point—the moral brain?
The first sentence of the paper sheds light on what the author is really trying to say, “Psychopathy is a personality disorder defined by a constellation of interpersonal, affective, and behavioral/lifestyle features, including manipulation and deception, grandiosity, shallow emotions, lack of empathy and remorse, an impulsive, irresponsible lifestyle, and the persistent violation of social norms and expectations.” What he should have said in the fourth sentence is that many people psychiatrists diagnose with sociopathy using the DSM do not score above 30 on the psychopathy inventory (PCL-R), so that by a strict definition they are not psychopaths. To give you some background about why there is an argument here please read Psychopath and Antisocial Personality Disorder: A Case of Diagnostic Confusion by Dr. Hare. He reports that the interpersonal behavior and emotions of psychopaths best define them. He objects to the fact that these are not emphasized enough in the current definition of ASPD, which places too much emphasis on antisocial behavior.
These arguments took place some time ago before it was discovered that both sociopathy (ASPD) and psychopathy are a spectrum. Before that time Dr. Hare said that “psychopaths” were those who scored more than 30 on his scale. But since that time we have discovered that many people who score between 20 and 30 on the tests have the same physical and brain abnormalities as those who score over 30. So in reality a person is not a sociopath or a psychopath a person simply possesses traits of these disorders to a high degree. The higher the degree of psychopathy the more likely it is that a person will have an abnormal moral brain. If we look at a group of people and do a correlation between the degree of sociopathy as measured by the DSM criteria and the degree of psychopathy as measured by the PCL-R there is a high correlation between the two. So your worst sociopath is also your worst psychopath. Rather than being an argument over trying to separate apples and oranges, this is an argument over how to best define an apple (or a bad apple depending on how you look at it).
Psychopathy and sociopathy are really patterns of extreme brain and endocrine function that we infer from observing a person’s behavior. The real question is which behaviors are most indicative of this extreme physiology? If you read the scientific literature you will discover that many individuals who score between 20 and 30 also have aberrant brain and hormonal function. So the problem is not criteria, the problem is the cut off score of 30 which is in my opinion too high. There are a couple of studies indicating people with scores as low as 12 might have abnormal moral brains. If the cut off for psychopathy is lowered to 20 or 25 there is considerably more overlap between the PCL-R and the DSM.
I happen to agree with Dr. Hare that his scale is better at identifying individuals high in psychopathic/sociopathic traits. But I don’t think he should stop at the PCL-R which is a test only specially trained clinicians can administer. He has also developed the P-Scan which is a 90 item test that anyone can use to rate another person’s psychopathy. I have used this scale and believe that if this was accepted as the rating scale for psychopathy/sociopathy everyone would be able to identify those high in these traits. Isn’t that what we should do? Why should the identification of morally insane people be only reserved for highly trained clinicians?
I also think we should get away from assuming sociopathy and psychopathy are categories that people either do or do not belong to. There are many instances where just a few psychopathic traits can do serious damage. Damaging people can have some of psychopathic traits and not others.
When psychopathic traits interact with a specific situation or opportunity to do harm there is likely to be trouble. An example of a trait-situation interaction is when a highly psychopathic person is a parent or spouse, or a boss. If the highly psychopathic person has low power and low situational opportunities for harm, he/she is less of a problem to society. Similarly society needs leaders and parents to be low in psychopathic traits because in these situations just a few traits bring out harmful behavior. If we focus on traits we can begin to discuss situation and trait interactions. If we focus on the traits, we will avoid making the mistake of saying, “He/she isn’t a sociopath, so he/she is O.K.” The authors are correct in saying that evil behavior is best predicted by the presence of psychopathic traits, irrespective of whether there is a “formal diagnosis” of psychopathy.
What I would like to see is studies of physiology using the P-Scan completed by relatives who know the subject well as an assessment. Although the question of what is different about the physiology of psychopaths/sociopaths is very important, it is not the only or even most practically important question. If psychopathy can only be identified by a few highly trained people, what good is the construct? But if we had a behavioral or psychological test that nearly anyone could use, and that test was related to abnormal physiology then it would be highly useful to humanity.
Furthermore, there are numerous hormonal and brain findings associated with psychopathy and sociopathy. It is likely that these findings relate to specific traits. For example, high testosterone is related to unrestricted sociosexual orientation, power motivation and impulsivity but is less related to low affection. In this regard, the P-Scan is very good because the 90 items examine psychopathic traits in detail. Next week, psychopathic traits and the moral brain.
OxDrover:
We’re posting at the same time again!? I would be most interested in reading your book, and I am confident other Lovefraud readers would also. Have you ever considered having it published? Don’t say no yet…just consider a seed planted. Maybe Donna or Dr. Leedom would be interested in it? Something to ponder…
Yes, I’ve also determined that S’s are BIG COWARDS. They like to bully, but have no courage…
So, Mr. Green, my old buddy… have you gotten around to being formally diagnosed yet or are ya still “arm chairing” it and proudly wearing the self proclaimed banner?
peggy:
Do you think specifically they target women who are “laissez-faire” about life? Very live and let live, accepting, non-judgmental, go with the flow, passive types?
You’d think since they seem so much about challenge and climbing Everest, they’d try to aim a bit higher than CONTROLLING someone who doesn’t believe in controlling others and isn’t the type to question behaviors as much.
Maybe they can only make inroads with certain, more relaxed types??
To this day it bugs me that the last time I saw the S he said I was about control. Yes, it was projection and even if it weren’t, he’s proven his word is about as useful as an old used band-aid. But that stuck, somehow, with me trying to figure out if I’m a controlling person underneath. And maybe being voiceless for so long has that flip repressed desire to control – if you’ve read at all about traits and their shadows, that would make sense.
And yet…it feels more like something negative he planted in my head to mess with me, yet another self-esteem killer and merely projection.
My closest friend since childhood thinks it untrue. She’s seen all phases of life from the bad experiences while young to marriage to kids and divorce, and she thinks I just want people to step-up to the plate, that my expectations are high for others but because they are even higher for my own behavior and ethics.
Anyway, I’m rambling – but there does seem to be something in the whole submissive persona that attracts the N/P.
i think they do go for sweet caring accepting people, who dont expect a lot in material sense. i was brougth up by a passive caring nurturer and i a m some what the same. i think they radar us. also someone on here said they go for intelligent types . then why do they do that cause an intelligent lady would have more chance of figuring out the scam wouldnt they? i am caring but intelligent and experienced in life so go firgure why did he go for me. i think the experience thing scares them a bit, thats why they go for younger woman normally or someone less experienced in life maybe. it was my life experience that made we aware of what he was doing in the end more than intelligence. even though we are smart the way they are is so alien to us we still may not click on to what is hapening. so why do they go f or intelligent woman? Any one know.
LilOrphan/Jules:
I don’t think “laissez-faire” necessarily means passive, but “let do” … easy-going, peace-loving, people who do not enjoy conflict. We are not, like S’s, just out to win, or to rule the world. We are sharing, kind, loving, nurturing…and yes, intelligent.
They are con men. What do con men do? They con. It is their job, and they are very good at it, they have been doing it all of their lives. They con us. They lie to us. They spoon-feed us the “dream” (mixed up with some pretty good lovin’, releasing endorphins and enhancing addictive chemicals in our brains), and then they betray us. I personally believe they “go for” more intelligent women because it makes for a better chase…makes the game more interesting for them…
Thank you Peggy, but I really don’t think my book is the kind of thing that would be of general interest. I have published a couple of small books on local history of the area in which I live, but this was just written to help me get a grasp and organize my thoughts and the patterns of his life and behaviors.
As far as what kind of victim they pick– people who are not generally suspicious. Some hold out a LURE of adventure (my p-bio father) some hold out a lure of money–I’ll invest your money and make you rich–others love, spirituality, or any other fantasy that they can produce for bait.
Some like to “con” people that are challenges, others like more submissive types. My P-biio-father liked both challenging victims and ones that were “stupid” as he called them, but in any case, as soon as he had succeeded in conning them he despised them. He reserved his most violent hates for those that he couldn’t con. People who would stand up to him put him into a violent rage. If he couldn’t scare them that way, he would do a smear campaign. I do know of two people he actually killed, but he claimed many more. He lied so much though, that I am not sure about the others he claimed to have killed.
I think Jules summed it up with “even though we are smart, the way they are is SO ALIEN to us we still may not click on what is happening”
I think some of the brighter Ps go for intelligent people because it is more of a challenge to them, like bagging a bigger bear on a hunt gives you “bragging rights” to being a better hunter than killing a bear cub. The challenge of the hunt. The brighter ones too, I think tend to be more arrogant.
Also, I read that a 25 point IQ difference between two people almost precludes any kind of deep communication between the two. I’m not sure if I believe that or not, but in any case, I think the brighter ones go for brighter victims, and the duller Ps go for people beneath them in intelligence.
Personally I know people with much less on an IQ score than me who would have figured out and stayed away from my P son. They saw through him a long time before I did. LOL So your IQ score doesn’t keep you from being gullible. Maybe in the end because we are bright we seem to think that protects us from doing stupid things. LOL
There is an old myth that very bright people don’t have any common sense—and I am not sure that there may not be come basis in this old “saying”—LOL I know a lot of people who wouldn’t be classified as much more than “low average” that have some pretty good insight into the P-behavior and wouldn’t stand for it a minute.
So I don’t think intelligence protects us, and I don’t think that being dull does either–maybe it is more EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE that is lacking in the victims. We just can’t comprehend that some others don’t have a conscience. That their emotions are not the same as ours. We PROJECT morality on to them the way they project blame on to us.
Jules, I think they go for intelligent women for a number of reasons. They get a thrill out of refining their tactics, and outwitting their prey – there is no fun for them in getting one over someone who is a bit dumb and who cannot behave like the perfect prey. Remember the fun is also in the chase. Also they need more intelligent women to respond and react to their mind games. When they drop hints or plant mental landmines, they want a partner who is going to use intelligent mental energy in focusing on them – even if the insinuations arent true, they just love winding people up – it gives them such power!! Unintelligent people just dont give them the same hit!
I know women who are not academically intelligent, but have what I call good ‘ground floor intelligence’ and would not put up with any c..p for one moment. Sometimes, I just think that intelligent people have a tendency to be led from their heads and whilst pondering numerous hypothesis, people with good ground floor common sense, dont have to think about things, they just act on their gut instinct.
OxD
The way I see it is this (and the P and I did talk about it) they pick women who will in some way “raise their status.” If it’s looks, for arm candy, that works. If it’s brains, so they can feel temporarily bright, that works also.
They’re empty so any number of women with multiple good qualities are needed in order to fill their “tanks”.
So I don’t think intelligence protects us, and I don’t think that being dull does either”“maybe it is more EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE that is lacking in the victims. We just can’t comprehend that some others don’t have a conscience. That their emotions are not the same as ours. We PROJECT morality on to them the way they project blame on to us.
Really like this! In the sense that we do have trouble seeing the bad. In a good world, that’s an excellent and angelic quality. In a world where P’s lurk, it’s not so good. But in and of itself, it’s an amazing quality. The world could not do without its dreamers and healers and idealists. It would be bleak, indeed. Just like it cannot do without its pragmatists, strong rational thinkers and take charge types.
What the world can do without? Sociopaths!!! 😀
We’ve seen all kinds of women here and at other S’path sites, smart, focused, grounded, book smart, street smart, no-nonsense, fluffy, loving, academic….and all rolled into one in some cases!
The only common denominator is that we’ve been taken by con men. I prefer to think that, whatever the reason, it was an intrinsically-good quality within us that attracted their hollow shells to us!
Thank you Orphan, you may have answered several questions that I have asked myself over and over again, about WHY I let my P-son keep me in the fog for SO LONG when if some man had hit me, he would have been out of my life in an instant—and calling the cops himself to get me off of him, yet I allowed my son to do what I would never have allowed a boy friend or a husband to do to me.
I took some verbally inappropriate crap off the BF, but NOT for long, I kicked him to the curb pretty quickly over all. The whole relationship only lasted about 8 months.
If having a large and thick set of “rosecolored glasses” makes me a dreamer or an idealist I guess that must be me, but somehow I have difficulty seeing how it has helped the world! LOL