Slashdot Mirror

Ah, I see, you were talking about fools in general, weren't you? Why tack on 'idealistic' then? Why not just say 'fools' and be done with it. You are being disingenuous and you know it: you tried to tar all idealists with the 'fools' label, but now you don't want to admit it.

One of the perks of being powerful is you don't have to go to psychiatric counseling and you don't get labeled a sociopath even if you are one. But here is a good citation: http://www.hare.org/links/saturday.html, it talks about how the characteristics of psychopaths or sociopaths, like lack of empathy or remorse, make them very good at climbing the corporate or political ladder.

No bosses, but facilitators and managers. Teachers, okay, but we're talking about children again. Judges, sure, they need power over others. Leaders, religious or otherwise, do not need power over others. If they are real leaders, people will follow out of self interest. Celebrities don't have power over others.

No, obviously people shouldn't get anything they want. But everyone should get the bare minimum: food, shelter, clean water, and access to medical care. If you want more than that, you work for it. And people will, because once people's basic physiological needs are met, social acceptance and respect become highly motivating factors.

As I understand it, there is more than a little support for this claim. For example, Robert Hare, apparently a well known criminal psychologist and professor emeritus of the University of British Columbia where he studied psychopathy, seems to be of this opinion.

Here's a suggestion: Don't shop Circuit City even if it is convenient. Find a nice mom & pop electronics store. They're harder to find, but worth the effort.

So torn. Mod "Insightful" or respond? Alas, my apologies to your karma (though given your ID, I'm guessing that was not an issue long ago). But I digress.

I wholeheartedly concur. Mom & Pops have a shorter feedback loop from the customer to the decision maker, so they are more customer oriented. They generally pay their employees better. They are, virtually by definition, run by independent entrepreneurs who believe in The American Dream, which is effectively nonexistent in giant corporations.

And, perhaps most importantly, psychopaths don't get all the money and promotions at Mom & Pops. At a Mom & Pop, being a psychopath is almost always bad for business. At major corporations, it is rapidly becoming (or maybe always was) the only effective means of advancement. It troubles me every time I buy from a major corporation and think of the deeply disturbed people to whom I am giving my hard earned money.

Or maybe I'm just jealous of those with the good sense to lack a conscience.

http://hare.org/links/saturday.html see

In other words, your typical serial rapist or rapist/murderer is a very likely candidate for psychopathy. Nonviolent offenders, or offenders who's victim of choice is male and/or prepubescent, are less likely candidates.

In my experience, I didn't find that to be true (I work as a psychologist in a prison, and I've worked with a sex-offender population before). I would say that psychopathy is evenly distributed between the two groups of violent and "nonviolent" sex offenders (Robert Hare estimated 20% of the prison population meets the definition of psychopathy, and 1% of the general population does). Both groups demonstrate superficial charm, grandiose self-worth, are manipulative, frequently lie, are impulsive and irresponsible, have little or no remorse, have poor control over their behavior, and do not take responsibility for their own behavior. The violent offenders often take that a step or two further by adding in some additional criminal behaviors, and are "thrill-seeking." When compared to a more general cross-section of prisoners, (thieves, drug dealers, insurance fraud), the sex offenders certainly show an elevation in psychopathic traits.

There are a couple points to remember here, the first being the fact that pedophilia is an unrelated disorder, so the number of people who are both pedo and psycho is small. The cross section between those two disorders may be almost unnoticable.

Again, I think Hare was right about 20% of these guys being psychopathic - when talking to pedophiles and cybersex offenders (like what Representative Foley has been accused of doing, or traders of child porn, etc.) they will minimize and attempt to justify their behavior . "I didn't force anyone" (but still hurt/manipulated their victims) and "I just downloaded pictures" (which perpetuates part of the market for more child pornography to be created), and descriptions of how unfairly they are/were/will be treated strongly pulls toward those aforementioned psychopathic traits - superficial charm, manipulative, lack of remorse, lack of responsibility. (On a side note, "I was drunk" or "I was a closeted gay man" or "I was abused as a child" do not excuse Rep. Foley's behavior.)

Sex-offenders, whether violent or non-violent, seem about as likely to be psychopathic, and both of those groups are more likely to be psychopathic than other groups of prisoners.

According to Dr. Hare about 20% of the prison population meets his definition of psychopathic. Further down the page, it says that 1% of the general population is psychopathic.

Psychopathy isn't exactly common you know.

Some would disagree and belive them to be as common as schizophrenics.

Hardly.

Obviously, some of the dissent comes from individuals with a vested interest.

And you seem to have misunderstood what I wrote. I never argued that psychopaths wouldn't qualify for the APSD checklist.

Not to mention that your counter argument fails to address that not all impairments in personality disorders require the failure to observe rules and laws.