
Letter from a psychopath - bdr
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/dh5l3q
======
ahi
"We are neither the cartoon evil serial killers, nor the 'its your boss' CEO's
always chasing profit at the expense of everyone else. While we are both of
those things, it is a sad caricature of itself."

I have been friends with a couple people with clear sociopathic and
psychopathic tendencies, and this is absolutely true. Most have been trained
to seek social inclusion like the rest of us. They just suck at it. The lack
of empathy is a strength while running a con or worse, but a serious handicap
when trying to build long-term social relationships. It's downright pathetic
to watch them attempt their social cons on people who are intelligent and
self-aware. If you know your own weaknesses you know when someone is trying to
attack them. When it's malicious the psychopath gets the boot fast. When it's
a harmless attempt to fit in, it just puts the psychopath in the awkwardly
manipulative category. The lack of empathy means they often don't know why
they've been ostracized.

FWIW, I have the opposite problem; a little too much empathy and guilt, but it
gives me the same talent of seeing the weakness in people. Which is why I'm
friends with them. They use my empathy for friendship, and I let them because
it's absolutely fascinating watching them work.

~~~
jwdunne
Building on what you've posted, psychopaths having diminished capacity to
build relationships could very well lead to depression or atleast unhappiness.
I find this really interesting because we often see a psychopath represented
as a remorseless beast void of any human emotions yet, looking from this
perspective, it almost paints psychopathy as a dibilating disorder.

I also note it probably wouldn't be correct for me to use psychopathy as the
name of a disorder but it should be fine for casual discussion.

~~~
mannicken
>I find this really interesting because we often see a psychopath represented
as a remorseless beast void of any human emotions yet, looking from this
perspective, it almost paints psychopathy as a dibilating disorder.

That is true. I only met one person who seemed to act sociopathic (as well as
admitting lacking the capacity to feel empathy) and she seemed to be shut off
from society. It's rather sad. Falling in love with her was a rather bad idea
too :)

------
AJ007
Its been a long while since I took psychology in college. What he was
describing sounded fairly common to me as an adult.

"Joseph Newman, the head of the psychology department at the University of
Wisconsin-Madison estimates that up to 1 percent of the general population in
the United States can be described as psychopathic(1). This means that there
are among us, roughly 3 million psychopaths."

If this is true, psychopaths should be concentrated heavily in certain careers
such as sales.

~~~
JonnieCache
There was a significant study which found higher rates of psychopathy (judged
using standard psychometric scales devised by Hare et al) in high-level
corporate environments than among violent criminals in prison.

I don't expect you to believe me on this one, so I am furiously trying to find
a reference... Hopefully I'll be back to edit with a link.

EDIT: There is of course this book, written by the aforementioned Dr Hare, but
still can't seem to find a paper. I remember seeing it in a recent BBC
documentary on the subject, which interviewed him directly, which isn't
exactly helpful.

<http://books.google.com/books?id=xfIEVtzj52YC>

EDIT: AHA! Here it is:
<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsl.925/pdf>

_"In this study, we had a unique opportunity to examine psychopathy and its
correlates in a sample of 203 corporate professionals selected by their
companies to participate in management development programs. The correlates
included demographic and status variables, as well as in-house 360°
assessments and performance ratings. The prevalence of psychopathic traits—as
measured by the Psychopathy Checklist—Revised (PCL-R) and a Psychopathy
Checklist: Screening Version (PCL: SV) “equivalent”—was higher than that found
in community samples. The results of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and
structural equation modeling (SEM) indicated that the underlying latent
structure of psychopathy in our corporate sample was consistent with that
model found in community and offender studies. Psychopathy was positively
associated with in-house ratings of charisma/presentation style (creativity,
good strategic thinking and communication skills) but negatively associated
with ratings of responsibility/performance (being a team player, management
skills, and overall accomplishments)"_

Looks like I misremembered the bit about a higher rate than in prisons,
instead it is rather a significantly higher rate than in society at large.

~~~
polemic
Would be interesting to look at these individuals vs their respective socio-
economic background.

~~~
morrow
Another view could be that the psychopathic behavior may get you fired in a
corporate setting and gunned down in a criminal one, so it may be simply that
psychopaths last longer in non-violent areas of society.

~~~
roel_v
I guess that would be corrected for in the above-mentioned "The correlates
included demographic and status variables" ? Lifespan is objective so rather
easy to correct for.

~~~
morrow
That's assuming you could account for the rate of psychopathy among those
criminals who died before they could be tested for it as well as those who
died before they were caught as criminals. Lifespan will also probably be
different for criminals on the streets vs. inside prison, so I'm not sure you
could simply adjust for that.

The original commenter amended his post to say that he mis-remembered about it
being higher than in prisons, anyway.

------
jonmc12
The designation of 'mental disorder' is largely one of subjectivity and social
convention. In some contexts, lack of emotional empathy is simply a gift[1].
As is the ability to apply rational empathy to a situation.

Physiological concerns aside, observed psychopathy is more or less a variation
of behavior that allows the individual to apply more cerebral perceptions to
social / emotional contexts.

Would the world be a better place if we had more people acting like this? or
the opposite case of applying social / emotional perceptions to a more
cerebral context? I would argue (for many reasons) that the answer to this
question is the former, whereas it has been the latter through most of human
history.

The capacity to act as a 'psychopath' may very well be a necessary evolution
of our culture, and in fact may become a desired genetic trait in future
years. More important that trying assimilate people with characteristics of
psychopathy may be to foster this ability of the mind - keep children away
from violence, keep young adults away from their egos.

[1] From my favorite new TV psychopath personality, Robert California of the
Office: "I'll tell you some thing I find unproductive. Constantly worrying
about where you stand based on inscrutable social cues, and then inevitably
reframing it all in a reassuring way so that you can get to sleep at night.
No, I do not believe in that at all. If I invited you to lunch, I think you're
a winner. If I didn't I don't. But I just met you all. Life is long, opinons
change. Winners, prove me right. Losers, prove me wrong."

~~~
andylei
actually, empathy is pretty great for our species as a whole. the lack of
empathy is what allows psychopaths to ignore the impacts of their actions on
other people.

if you knew for a fact that you wouldn't experience any negative effects (like
going to jail, having people label you as an outcast, etc.), would you kill a
complete stranger for $100? if you had no empathy, you would.

~~~
adrianwaj
Note, in the documentary "I, Psychopath" <http://youtu.be/jKvhKI6Kxew> they
run tests in the MRI to predict psychopathy as the inability to consider
future consequences on present choices. Thus, in view of this, lack of empathy
is not the determining factor in psychopathy, it is lack of foresight.
(perhaps it was about being oblivious to future pain - can't quite recall)

~~~
jsmcgd
Interesting, I recently watched a show that showed that psychopaths are just
as able to predict consequences, just like everyone else, but they just don't
care if it negatively affects other people. Not because they're actively bad
but because they have no empathic impulse.

Also it showed that they demonstrate no emotional response to words such as
'rape'. If you could monitor everyone's brain who just read that word in an
MRI, you would be able to see mental activity that is associated with negative
emotions. Everyone except psychopaths.

------
ericb
I suspect the default state of AI would be psychopathy. As I imagine it, an AI
with goals, but not morals or empathy would behave exactly like a psychopath.
Maybe psychopathy is the default state and empathy and morals are just
evolutionary add-ons t encourage cooperation.

~~~
icebraining
That depends on the goals; you could define the Three Laws[1] as inviolable
goals.

[1]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics>

~~~
ericb
You still end up with a psychopath with moral goals. The rules leave room for
manipulation, exploiting weakness, feigning emotion without understanding,
lying, etc.

I think there are still more great sci-fi stories to be extrapolated from
Asimov's laws.

------
subaruWRX55
The problem with the assumption that common people are inferior is that you
will actually find proof that they are. It's a vicious cycle of self prophecy.

If we treat people as they are, we make them worse. If we treat people as they
ought to be, we help them become what they are capable of becoming. Johann
Wolfgang vonGoethe [1749 - 1832]

------
adrianwaj
Liked it except for the last sentence, which I think is a manipulation.

"In the end, psychopaths need to be given that very thing everyone believes
they lack for others, empathy."

Any feeling you give will be used against you in their treacherous games - you
won't get true feeling back. Don't be their stepping stone.

~~~
ams6110
Who's to say the entire letter isn't manipulation? After all it's written by a
psychopath. "First principles, Clarice. Simplicity. Read Marcus Aurelius. Of
each particular thing ask: what is it in itself? What is its nature?"

------
namank
I'd like to meet this person. It takes deliberate choice and a MUCH effort to
act out against your nature. Though it may not be of the same degree, the
effort shown here is not unlike that of a 12 year old suspected of ADD trying
to do good in school.

My glass is raised this person.

And here is the ironic part. While the author of the letter chooses to place
emotional stability over strategic ploys, most of our MBA schools, finance
majors, corporate lawyers and hopeful business students want nothing more than
to become what the author is coming away from.

------
Alex3917
The other day I found a website called sociopathworld.com, their FAQ is a
great read:

[http://www.sociopathworld.com/p/frequently-asked-
questions.h...](http://www.sociopathworld.com/p/frequently-asked-
questions.html)

------
wccrawford
"Such as statement might tempt you to say 'well obviously you're not a real
psychopath then'. As if the definition of a psychopath is someone who exploits
others for their personal power, satisfaction or gain.

A slightly more benign (but still highly inaccurate) definition is that a
psychopath is someone who feels little guilt or empathy for others. "

That's not accurate at all. He wants to claim he's still a psychopath because
he thinks it's made him special, but he's -not- still a psychopath. He was
cured of that.

He's also not the only non-psychopath with those abilities. The condition may
have honed those abilities for him, but it's not the only way to obtain them.

~~~
gnaritas
You can't be cured of psychopathy.

~~~
wccrawford
Argue with the article, not me. He's the one claiming to be perfectly sociable
now.

~~~
gnaritas
No he didn't, he claimed to learn how to manage it; that's not a cure nor did
he claim it so.

------
jpdoctor
Everyone needs to get burned by one of these guys, so that you know how to
recognize it.

There are some that are amazingly smooth and seem completely normal. You don't
even notice until the tip of the knife is penetrating your back.

------
sambeau
For those of you taking guesses at what the current thinking is about
Psychopaths, I advise watching this Ted Talk by Jim Fallon.

[http://www.ted.com/talks/jim_fallon_exploring_the_mind_of_a_...](http://www.ted.com/talks/jim_fallon_exploring_the_mind_of_a_killer.html)

------
jka
I've always been interested in psychology, but I've been reading a little more
recently. I think it's possible to use the concepts of 'control' and
'evolution' in relation to sociopaths; let me try to illustrate:

It's so-called human nature for individuals and groups to compete over
resources - water, food, shelter, even sex, and latterly, money and power.
I've been wondering whether this urge to control is in fact what is behind the
behaviour of sociopaths. If we always had to have remorse whenever we obtained
a resource, then would we survive as a species?

Of course sociopathy is a scale, not a division between 'good' and 'bad'
people, but it's pretty clear from what's been going on at Wall Street
(workplace of perhaps the most sociopathic group of people around) that there
is a struggle going on - right now - between those in control and those who
have lost power.

It's interesting that as history has progressed, communication tools have
continued to bring people together -- but also extend the reach of influence
and control. Wars have become larger and larger as communication has sped up
and reached across broader distances. What we have now seems to me, perhaps
extravagantly, to be a large scale confrontation between those in power and
those outside.

We'll be witness to information wars - PR publications and spin,
disinformation tactics, appeals to the heart - and perhaps some extreme
exertion of control (note that the Occupy Boston protests have recently been
suppressed by the police there -- and the Federal interpretation of the
Patriot act is not standing up to scrutiny by legal questioners)

This might be a form of evolutionary conflict at a grand scale and fueled by
social media (the thing that is really about to bring about a social
singularity, well before any technological singularity) -- and because of
this, we maybe have to question the people who are in control of the social
media we use.

How does this relate to the original post? Note that the author is essentially
arguing that psychopaths are part of humanity too and to be kept. I am not
arguing that they should be controlled or destroyed; I think treatment is
possible -- as does C.

------
Jage
Though it may seem cruel to say this in his death, looking at Steve Jobs'
behavior when he was younger really makes me wonder whether he was a
psychopath

Anyone else see the commonalities?

------
queensnake
Reminiscent of 'Blindsight', an SF novel by Peter Watts. Humans have
resurrected the genes of vampires (don't stop reading! it's hard SF) who are
psychopaths and humans' predators, with concomitant higher intelligence. For
this intelligence and dispassion they're the perfect choice to command in life
and death missions. It's a good book, and it contains a lot of the feel of
this guy.

~~~
jobeyonekenobi
A wonderful book - available free here:
<http://www.rifters.com/real/Blindsight.htm>

------
dhugiaskmak
The author of this post, Jon Ronson, wrote a book called _The Psychopath Test_
that is a pretty good read on the subject.

<http://www.jonronson.com/psycho.html>

He also wrote _The Men Who Stare at Goats_ , if you've read that or seen the
movie.

------
lallysingh
"I hope that it can remain confidential for the time being, seeing as it is
quite personal. "

Dude, wtf?

------
adelevie
The letter made me think of an odd combination of Dexter and Larry David.

------
vadiml
It occurs to me that the profile he dress is excellent fit for most successful
political leaders

------
westiseast
this is one of the most interesting 'blog' posts I've read in a long time.
Kudos to the letter-writer for exposing his own inner mind that publicly.

------
ChuckMcM
Fascinating if it can be believed.

------
danbmil99
Dexter?

------
imperialdrive
Fascinating indeed.

------
fleitz
Other than the serial killer thing and lets face it the army spends good money
finding 100% sane people willing to kill lots of people, I just don't get what
the big deal about psychopathy is. Most people want to feel loved or whatever
the cues are for that emotion and lets face it, there is no way to "know"
whether someone "loves" you. All you see are outward displays which are highly
mediated by the culture in which the display occurs. Also, you're going to
need people at the top with the emotional capacity to know that it's better
for the group to fire 1,000 people today, rather than shut the whole concern
down in 6 months.

Aren't most people just failed social actors who are rather poor at picking
the signs in which to display their emotional communication? Psychopathy
actually makes me think far more of vulcans than ted bundy.

~~~
potatolicious
> _"there is no way to "know" whether someone "loves" you. All you see are
> outward displays which are highly mediated by the culture in which the
> display occurs."_

 _Wow_. I can't think of a way to rebut this without diving into personal
accusations... but it seems that you've missed out on a _lot_ in life.

~~~
fleitz
When you feel loved is it not the neurons in your own brain generating that
feeling? That was my point.

You may also want to consider the evolutionary pressure to love certain people
in your family.

Do you think it's mere coincidence that massive amounts of oxytocin are
necessarily for lactation, giving birth, released after birth, released after
orgasm, and that this drug also just happens to create loving emotional bonds?

Seems that evolution is also manipulating our romances and the loves of our
lives. On the other hand it's probably good for society that we're chemically
manipulated in this fashion. My point is not that 99% of these feelings aren't
"real" my point is more of a skeptical nature in that it becomes impossible to
figure out how much is "real" and how much is chemical or other mechanisms of
signalling.

~~~
potatolicious
> _"impossible to figure out how much is "real" and how much is chemical or
> other mechanisms of signalling."_

I don't see the need to make the distinction at all. So what if consciousness
is just a bunch of electrical impulses, or that love is a giant dose of
oxytocin - I'm not sure what would lead you think that these things are not
"real" simply because they have some evolutionary/chemical basis.

I can have a delicious lunch today - but does the food actually taste good? Or
is it adulterated by mental conditioning? Maybe I only like broccoli because
of childhood mental conditioning. Or maybe it brings back a fond memory. Or
perhaps it only tastes good because of the presence of certain chemicals?

... Does it matter?

~~~
praptak
Yes, it matters - both in food and in relationships. With modern chemistry
unhealthy food can taste as good as what evolution has shaped us to detect as
good food. With a psychopath a fake relation can feel as good as a true one.

In both cases you will know the difference, just not immediately.

~~~
potatolicious
That would justify vigilance and caution, not outright dismissal of all
emotion as socially-conditioned, non-real constructs.

Certainly it would not justify something as cynical as this:

> _"Aren't most people just failed social actors who are rather poor at
> picking the signs in which to display their emotional communication?"_

which was the part that really rubbed me the wrong way.

~~~
wnight
>> _"Aren't most people just failed social actors who are rather poor at
picking the signs in which to display their emotional communication?"_ > which
was the part that really rubbed me the wrong way.

But, aren't they?

Not actor in the sense of a script/a lie, but in the sense of trying,
ultimately imperfectly, to convey how we feel to the world around us?

How often do you think you nail the perfect smile, the perfect handshake, the
perfect snuggle, to demonstrate happiness, but not too much, familiarity and
strength without being overbearing, and tenderness without clinging?

Combine that with the imperfect feedback you get from others and we have
really have no idea about the finer details of anyone but yourself.

Not just that you can't detect lies but that we have no way of telling if our
perceptions of red are the same, let alone a hug or a complex thought.

~~~
potatolicious
You're right and have a point - the question is, do our imperfect expressions
of emotion somehow rob them of their reality, intent, or genuineness?

It seems to me (perhaps this is a misreading of the post) would have us
dismiss emotional expression as inherently untrustworthy, or somehow unreal. I
disagree vehemently.

Sure, our expressions, and the way they're perceived, is colored by brain
chemistry, social conditioning, and a myriad of other factors... but I
maintain that it simply makes them more complex, not less real.

------
dbbo
I don't think the term "psychopath" is used clinically anymore, except by Hare
et al. who insist that there is a difference between sociopathy and
psychopathy. I have read at least 5 separate explanations of the differences
between the two, but I couldn't tell one from the other. Even the DSM-IV
criteria for antisocial personality disorder are quite vague, as I see it.
Aside from Hare, other psychologists like Millon have basically introduced
their own classifications of people with antisocial tendencies. Millon's
subtypes are even less useful because they overlap other personality
disorders, like narcissistic, schizoid, and histrionic.

But consider Mr. X, who has several characteristics of schizoid personality,
was described as alexithymic by a clinical psychologist, scored an 8 Simon
Baron-Cohen's Empathy quotient[1] (whereas most people with Asperger Syndrome
or high-functioning autism score about 20), scored equally low on the Social
Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS)[2]. If Mr. X shows any kind of aggression, he
might very well be considered to have ASP. Without the aggression, he seems to
fall somewhere in the Autism spectrum.

Then there are also conduct and dissocial disorders, which have a lot in
common (lying, stealing, violent behavior) with ASD. As far as I know, only
the ICD-10 definition of ASD attempts to rule out conduct disorder.

To me it seems like most of the terms in the antisocial realm are pretty much
generic labels that aren't very useful. The "psychopath" kind of touched on
that implicitly in his letter a few times. It's at least some food for
thought.

1 -
[http://glennrowe.net/BaronCohen/EmpathyQuotient/EmpathyQuoti...](http://glennrowe.net/BaronCohen/EmpathyQuotient/EmpathyQuotient.aspx)

    
    
       (this is not a test used in clinical settings)
    

2 - <http://cooccurring.org/public/document/sias.pdf>

~~~
vacri
Yes, we need to abandon 'psychopath' and 'sociopath' because they have set-in-
concrete meaning for laypeple, which can only lead to misunderstanding.

Separate to that, having had a background in neurology and mental health and a
degree in psychology, in my opinion you will never understand mental health
disorders unless you have one, live with or are very close to someone who has
one, or study it specifically.

But I guess what I'm getting at is that to someone with no knowledge of mental
health issues, things aren't going to make sense ("Why would they do that?")
because, well, mental illness is frequently highly irrational to begin with.
The love affair the public media has with the 'psychopath' label does not help
in the slightest. It just contributes to the 'us vs them' mentality.

~~~
dbbo
To make things worse, most of the time when I hear the term "psychopath" or
"psycho" in colloquial speech, the speaker actually means "psychotic" or even
something as general as "crazy".

