

Do Psychopaths Make the World Go Round? - wslh
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2011/06/do-psychopaths-make-the-world-go-round

======
anonymoushn
As a person who does not experience empathy (that is, a psychopath), I am
somewhat insulted that Robert Lamb is telling the Internet that I am also
"dishonest, undependable, impulsive, prone to irresponsible behavior for no
reason, prone to casual and callous interpersonal and romantic relationships,"
and "quick to make excuses for [my] actions, blaming others." It seems
especially bad that Mr. Lamb chooses to misinform people about psychopathy
under the guise of clearing up misconceptions about psychopathy.

Now that I notice he lifted these words from the Scientific American article
he linked, I guess I can only assume that he didn't know that he was
misinforming people. I would prefer that a distinction be made between the
characteristics necessary to be a psychopath and the ones that commonly occur
in psychopaths, so as to make a better impression of psychopaths in the mind
of the reader.

~~~
runjake
Reviewing your comment history, where you clearly express emotion and some
empathy, and acknowledge consequences, you don't fit the bill as a psychopath.
You may share certain attributes with psychopathy, or fancy yourself being
one, but all indications are that you are not one.

The second indicator that you are not a psychopath is that you disagree with
Robert Lamb's description of psychopathy, which are not insults -- they are
the qualifying traits of a psychopath.

~~~
anonymoushn
It pleases me to hear that I give the impression of empathy.

My impression of the (recent) literature on the matter was that absence of
empathy, in addition to the criteria for ASPD, is necessary and sufficient for
one to be considered a psychopath. One could easily have both of these things
without also being unreliable, impulsive, or dishonest.

~~~
runjake
I think that you're deluding yourself, for whatever reason.

And on your second point, your impression is incorrect. These are qualifying
traits of ASPD (formerly "psychopathy").

------
wisty
This is falling into pop psychology. Psychology is like linguistics - you can
describe it using a rough model, but should keep in mind that it's all just an
abstraction.

Actually, there's some value in telling people that narrow-minded prescriptive
grammars are "correct" - that encourages people to write the same way.
Encouraging people to think of every little deviation as a disorder can do
much more harm than good.

Queue an onslaught of self-diagnosed "Hare psychopaths" who will try to act
out the role.

Yes, there are probably a few real psychopaths out there in the extremes. But
that's no reason to encourage people with a mild case of "Asshole Personality
Disorder" to start telling themselves they are merciless machines who are
capable of anything.

------
BasDirks
" _Maybe spies, lawyers and bosses need a dash of the unhinged if they’re to
betray, scrutinize, and fire those around them. Sure, they make sucky friends
and sucky spouses, but the rest of the time they’re making the trains run on
time._ "

betrayal, unreasonable scrutiny, and the ability to fire people is not what
the world needs. People who think so are often incredible softies intrigued by
their own cruelty. There are better alternative approaches that involve more
than predator instinct and egomania.

~~~
michaelochurch
Psychopaths make terrible spies and soldiers, for what should be obvious
reasons. They have no sense of honor and they're individualistic in some very
dangerous ways. The military tries to filter them out, not bring them in.
Since lawyers and business leaders have to make much easier decisions than
people in the military, I'd argue the same for those jobs.

There is one job at which psychopaths are, in all aspects, better performers
(more effective, less likely to quit) than anyone else: torturing-- an act
that produces no value (as an interrogation technique, it's nearly useless)
and something that people shouldn't be doing in the first place.

~~~
WildUtah
_There is one job at which psychopaths are, in all aspects, better performers
(more effective, less likely to quit) than anyone else: torturing_

And also sales. But I guess that's just a subset of torturing, if popups,
Flash-ads, and background music on ad pages is any indication.

------
felipemnoa
You can spin almost anything into a positive light. Like, "hey I know I killed
you, but you know what, this is just a horrible world that you are better off
death". I wonder if Hitler was a psychopath, he may have been. <sarcasm> He
certainly made the world go round, fighting him lit a fire under all the
western nations which in turn allowed us to make great advances in rocketry,
nuclear power, and god knows what. Sure, he killed millions of innocent people
but you know what, at least he did make the world go round. Even Germany
benefited immensely, it emerged as a world economic power. Thank god for
psychopaths, what would we do without them. </sarcasm>

~~~
FrojoS
Exactly. But though you emphasize it with _< sarcasm>_ it still might contain
a lot of truth [1]. Its known as the "Mephisto Principle":

 _Mephisto: "I am a part of that power, that constantly wants to do harm and
constantly creates the good." (Goethe, Faust 1)_ [2]

As an example, let's assume that, soon, human race has to become
interplanetary in order to survive. Now, are we more likely to get there with
threat of inter-human war and large defense funding? Perhaps. Until recently,
I used to call DARPA money "dirty" and insulted many fellow students this way.
But I'm starting to realize this _might_ be naive. Without DARPA Net I might
not be able to have this discussion here.

[1] If I had the choice I would go back in time and prevent it. But that would
still be a difficult decision. I guess this play of thought does not not lead
to anything useful. A more useful question might be: Would you like to prevent
a future world war. Sure! [2] <http://www.maxeiner-miersch.de/mephisto_e.htm>

------
hxa7241
The more strongly everyone is inclined to cooperate, the more advantage there
is to individually defect and exploit. And the more people defecting, the more
benefit there is to cooperation.

At the very core of moral theory is this conflict of individual and group. And
I suppose evolution just realises that in some form of perpetual dynamic
equilibrium.

------
michaelochurch
I'll answer this: fuck, no.

Psychopaths are good at taking credit for others' accomplishments but rarely
produce anything of value. They're generally quite lazy, in fact. They're
politically effective and do well in many social environments in the short
run, but their long-term contributions are almost always disastrous.

You don't need to be a psychopath to make tough decisions: firing bad
employees, for example. You just need experience, vision, and the willingness
to take responsibility for difficult decisions.

I think a slight narcissism can be beneficial as a motivator for some people,
but that's a different discussion.

~~~
cheez
You completely nailed it.

~~~
jcitme
HN, you dropped the ball here. Even Reddit would spot a comment like "Nailed
it" and see that it doesn't contribute in any way.

This community should try to stop a decline in quality...

~~~
FrojoS
For people not used to the HN / Reddit point system this requires some
learning. I had my fair share of "I second this" posts and took my down votes.

As long as HN is growing and new people, who are used to pin boards and
mailing lists without a voting system, come in, you will have this problem.
Just down vote them if you have ability.

Maybe, this should be more emphasized in the FAQ [1]. When I signed up here
recently it was _not_ obvious to me, that such posts should be avoided.

[1] <http://ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html>

------
strait
No, no, no. Psychopathy in a leader has a net effect toward organizational
mediocrity, at best. Start observing in the real world and this becomes
obvious.

------
ryanklee
There is a difference between psychopathy and selfish disregard: selfish
disregard wants to be justified, wants to connect to reasons for its disregard
-- it is not fully disjunct from societal norms. This association here is
nonsense and revealing. No psychopath can function in an institution (for
long) and neither can a sociopath. As said elsewhere by others, just because
you don't want germs on your hands doesn't mean you're OCD. Likewise, just
because you harbor highly self-centered traits, it doesn't mean you are a
psychopath.

It's so nice to have a label for your guilt. If you don't subscribe to a
religion, then picking up the DSM-IV/V is the next best thing.

Poor thinking at best; irresponsible definition at worst.

------
JacobAldridge
"The reasonable man bends himself to suit the world. The unreasonable man
bends the world to suit himself. Without the unreasonable man, there can be no
progress."

Now, I agree with other here who claim you can be slightly narcissistic,
unreasonable etc without being a psychopath. But there's something in the
theory - and especially in that quote, which I love and whose source I will
now try to track down - that applies to my goals in life, and probably to many
startups.

Edit: George Bernard Shaw: _"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."_

~~~
cheez
This has nothing to do with being a psychopath.

You can be stubborn and still be a lover.

You can be firm and still donate your time.

Psychopaths are "me, me, me". Startups are about "how can we enter into a
mutually beneficial voluntary exchange?"

So, no, psychopaths do not help startups at all. In fact, I'd say it would be
quite rare for a diagnosed psychopath to have a successful startup.

~~~
Mz
From what I have heard, serial killers are typically small business owners. It
helps give them the freedom they need to do as they please. (I think that cuts
both ways and can also be a force for good: Supposedly, the founding fathers
of the US felt strongly that democracy was best safeguarded by having plenty
of independent small business owners -- i.e. people positioned to speak their
own minds publicly and not fear being fired for it.)

~~~
cheez
I'd like to see those stats.

~~~
Mz
I don't have any stats. It is something I have seen on TV shows (like 'Cold
Case Files') where they talk about profiling -- the detailed kind, not the
"fast driving ethnic male is probably a drug dealer" kind. But the kind where
they run it past a forensic psychologist and get a detailed report to help
them find a serial killer. They repeatedly say that serial killers tend to be
small business owners, in part because they don't do well with a regular job
where other folks are telling them what to do. And in two of the cases I
recall, when they did find the killer, he was, in fact, a small business owner
and closely fit many of their other parameters surprisingly well. I would
suggest you google it if you are interested in actual stats. (If you do,
sharing would be cool.)

Sorry I can't do better than that. But have an upvote cuz it's a great
question.

------
VMG
Related: Jon Ronson's "The Psyocopath Test"
(<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6aCir5bu-c>)

Also featured on the recent This American Life podcast.

------
known
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists
in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the
unreasonable man." --George Bernard Shaw

------
chopsueyar
He meant 2011 science festival, right?

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2644349>

------
andrewcooke
curious. i would have expected a more positive response here. like the article
says, psychopaths have the positive characteristics necessary for an
entrepreneur. there was a quote from pg a while back (can't remember the
wording, but it was discussed here) about looking for people who fit the same
description.

of course, i'm not saying entrepreneurs are loony axe wielders. but i don't
see why psycopathy has to be binary all or nothing. every day i see the less
pleasant (more psycopathic) people getting ahead.

the nice guy finishes last. it's common knowledge. why all the naysayers?
guilt?

~~~
jimbokun
"the nice guy finishes last. it's common knowledge."

It's an old, tired cliche.

~~~
turbojerry
Which Richard Dawkins using Game Theory found to be wrong-

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nice_Guys_Finish_First>

------
ricardo_sdl
Maybe they just solve the problems created by themselves.

------
thinkcomp
Only if you let them.

------
jpr
Probably not.

But one thing I'd think is true is that no person that is primarily nice and
sociable has ever done anything that has significantly advanced the state of
anything worthwile.

