It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sympathy For Sociopaths?

page: 2
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2014 @ 02:39 PM
link   
I read in the comments that sociopatha are born sociopatha but no one has said anythingabout not being born line but becoming one layer in life.Or maybe someone did post about that and I missed it I don't know.So can someone who was not born a sociopath become one and how? My guess someone who has had experienced many tragic events in their life would start to numb themselves, try to turn off as if you can switch emotions on and off, try to decide when to feel and when not being to feelAnd tmaybe they hit the switch so many times that the switch is broken and they don't feel nothing at all.Many addicts use drugs cause they don't wanna feel and want to repress things would you say their are unknowingly trying to become sociopaths? Just somethoughts.




posted on Sep, 28 2014 @ 03:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Flowfessional
I read in the comments that sociopatha are born sociopatha but no one has said anythingabout not being born line but becoming one layer in life.Or maybe someone did post about that and I missed it I don't know.So can someone who was not born a sociopath become one and how? My guess someone who has had experienced many tragic events in their life would start to numb themselves, try to turn off as if you can switch emotions on and off, try to decide when to feel and when not being to feelAnd tmaybe they hit the switch so many times that the switch is broken and they don't feel nothing at all.Many addicts use drugs cause they don't wanna feel and want to repress things would you say their are unknowingly trying to become sociopaths? Just somethoughts.


There is some argument over exact definitions, but a common one used in my work environment is that "psychopaths are born, sociopaths are created." Both have issues with emotional connections. Psychopaths have a physiological difference (in other words, there is a physical difference in their brain) that cause this, while sociopaths have their ability to form emotional connections damaged through trauma, abuse, etc.

Sociopaths are often able to form some limited connection (perhaps just with one other person, for example) because their ability is damaged rather than non-existent.

Psychopaths tend to be more stable and capable of living "without detection", while sociopaths tend to be less controlled and more prone to anger and violence. A very rough and generic assessment, there is some dispute over the actual definitions and many people use the two terms interchangeably.



posted on Sep, 28 2014 @ 04:05 PM
link   
I suppose I would be curious about wether or not Sociopathy can develop from negative stimuli?
Is PTSD a path to it?

PART of fighting in a war is instinct to develop the ability to harm others ,with superior skill.
Just knowing THAT is sociopathic,right?
edit on 28-9-2014 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2014 @ 07:52 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 28 2014 @ 08:23 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

uh huh

And what was the point of you saying that? I shouldn't have started a thread? Shouldnt have wanted to start a conversation and spread ideas?

This is precisely the type of petty annoyances that a self aware person wouldn't bother with. I wrote all that I did; you could have ignored that. But instead decided to trivialize all that was interesting or thought provoking in what I wrote - what you would have been more attentive to if you were mindful as you read - and diminshed it to "have a wonderful day psychoanalyzing everything" - as if, my friend, the world and the realities we encounter aren't in themselves intensely interesting.

A blase response - or apathy - is a sad and utterly powerful regulator of how the world appears to you. It would be wise of you to pay attention to that. Or not. I'm probably just "Annoying" i.e. triggering an affective switch and dissociation in your mind.

BTW, this isn't just "psychoanalysis" anymore; its clinical understand plus cognitive science and neuroscience.

Fixing the world and making it a better place (unless your under the convenient allusion that things are just great, take a look beyond the front door; offline. Learn about the world (online, as a great resource).

Anyways, this site, does, well, its not exactly a university style forum; some people are capable of more abstract and reflective thought; but most people aren't. I am writing still despite this because, well, Im a stupid lazy ass who should try to find a more educated audience.



posted on Sep, 28 2014 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: dodol

But thats the thing, were, or I, am talking about what constitutes rational and enlightened behavior.

Since all our social theories, justified by neuroscience, developmental psychology, clinical psychology and many other schools of thought, show that human beings are highly determined by their social context. The idea that "genes" exist as some final arbiter to how we become is a 1980's belief that is no longer cogent to the 2014 educated mind. Everything is complex. And the complexity is the interaction between the individual nervous system - say you or me - and the social realities we encounter. The social realities impinge upon our nervous systems and trigger motivational system responses. The moivational systems are a built in instincts, the main one of which is the instinct for survival. In human beings, the 'survival' of the individual organism is paralleled by the survival of his "self system" in his mind.

None of this has ever been known. Never in human history has this complex and scientific and understanding of the human situation been understood. Our theories correspond and approximate to what our technological tools (both physical and mental) have shown. Each of us are the consequence of interactions between ourselves and our environments and therefore someone who doesn't experience emotionally (affectively, to use an academic term) what is cognitively know, has at some earlier point in his life been affectively/cognitively determined to be the type of person he experiences himself to be; in main, I'm referring to what we allow ourselves to think and feel, and how we unconsciously draw a line - not knowing we've been determined by this essentially by living in a very unself aware society. A society which privileges individual cognition to social intersubjectivity.

Even as I write this I know many (perhaps most, this is a conspiracy site afterall) will read this and be vicerally turned off; something about what I'm writing annoys them. What is "annoy" other then a feeling that chafes at consciousness. It is a reaction of the conscious mind to an unprocessed feeling that is magically transmogrified - projected - outwards into the thing you are reading, or to the person you're talking with. The "other" in this self-object relation becomes an object of intense dislike. Why? Usually, we don't think clearly when things hit us with a strong emotional force. Were bamboozled. The ability to symbolize what is experienced is momentarily suspended; and in that state, evolution has developed a really intelligent response system that aims for fast reactivity; having a body means having a mind that is unconsciously structured to maximize survival (that is the extent of our implicit knowing system) so our minds think and we take the thinking for our believing. And in doing so it becomes a part of our SELF NARRATIVE. Things that chafe at us aren't meaningful, whereas things that don't, are.



posted on Sep, 28 2014 @ 08:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Calalini




There is more and more evidence all the time that sociopathy has some genetic elements. So because sociopaths don't feel compassion they don't deserve compassion?? What sort of logic is this? As someone else noticed, there is a anti-gun, political (conservative bashing) element to your post. So Mr. Wilson is a sociopath because he is pro-gun?


Not at all. But you are correct about the anti-conservative bias.

But in his case, it is pretty obvious and clear to any person who works with sociopaths or people with narcissistic personality disorder that this guy undoubtedly falls into that category.

First, the content, what he says and why, would indicate that. But even more important is the implicit, non-verbal cues in his body language, facial expression; a sort of braggart quality to his rhetoric. It makes me want to say "what the hell is wrong with you? Why? Why do you want all these things"? And then he would tell me; but in telling me he would only be giving verbal narration to that unverbalizable "feeling tone" that underlies his experience of the world. It is this - particularly unempathic - perception, which undoubtedly elicits a slew of conspirtorial ideas about others (afterall, our cognitions about others, if not reflected upon and analyzed, are often based upon our own affective experiences of the world).

This isn't and shouldn't be surprising. I'm not calling for electroshock, and I do understand the potential abuses in attaching a term or diagnostic idea to a person; but the fact does remain that someone with his mental structure lacks a very important and vital piece of relational - human - information: other peoples emotions/feelings. And that being the case, we need to be cognizant of them and protect ourselves from them; because although they are 'defective' - they don't think so; some have even written that it is an evolutionary "advantage" - for what and for whom? But the sociopath himself.

As a matter of fact, clearly human sociality is an ADVANCEMENT and advantage to human functioning. Ultimately, we live for our relationships; and only in our anger and upset do we feel estranged; and begin to cultivate and build cognitions of others - unknowns - as "strange"; viscerally and affectively 'beyond' my cognitive capacity to contain and feel.

I do not consider sociopathy to just be another "advantage"' unlike with homosexuality, sociopathy creates clear ethical and moral problems for a society. It, without a doubt - regardless of if you've been formally diagnosed or not - an issue that necessitates psychological therapy.



posted on Sep, 28 2014 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Astrocyte

Understood.
I live in a country where most people could be categorized with 'the lack of compassion'.
I was in 'that group' too and I have no idea how I managed to 'reach' where I am (but I think the ATS family indirectly helped me too)
When I became aware of this, I began to detest these people LOL and I kept trying to push anyone who is in that category to change.... It was so tiring, because it was not fruitful.
Then I came to some 'annoying' posts related to this kind of topic (IIRC, one of them was written by Bluesma LOL).
The more I get 'annoyed' by these kind of posts, the more I accept the 'sociopath' group as what they are.
But I understood later that those posts are actually neutral, they don't pick any side, which is why it could be 'annoying' to anyone who choose either sides.

Your writings don't annoy me, nor will any writings of others annoy me.
Honestly, I really enjoy reading these kinds of writings.
I learned few things too from this topic and I really appreciate that


peace
edit on 28-9-2014 by dodol because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2014 @ 11:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Astrocyte

Answer: That would be a negative Sir.

Explanation: Personal experiences with people
of this nature has resulted in the observation that
subjects tend to "apologize in their own
odd fashion", and then immediately revert to
their initial behavior without any recollection
of their "apology".

Great Thread and Study on your behalf !

Thank You , S&F



posted on Sep, 29 2014 @ 12:26 AM
link   
I think the fellow is very interesting, and strikes me as passionate, smart and controlled. He raises a good point, whether we like it or not the technology is out there. If we lived in a democracy, we the citizens would be having these debates in open forum. This technology and its applications as well as many other things would be settled with community discussion.

Citizen's have not been consulted on any of the massive changes that have occurred in their countries or in their lives for over 50 years. Mostly they aren't even allowed to speak about a lot of the changes.

So public discussion on this important subject is a waste of time - which is what he is saying.

As for him being a sociopath I doubt any qualified mental health practitioner would attempt to make such a diagnosis on the basis of a 10 minute video clip, I know I wouldn't.

What I did get from Astrocyte's post was alot of grandiose bullying language, rush to judgement and faulty reasoning.......frankly scary stuff.

Firstly YOU made an assumption and then you condemned him for it. As if by wishing it, you make it so. You said he was "fundamentally and profoundly damaged", and that he wouldn't even be conscious of his deficits. That is a huge and dangerous leap you have made. Your words have de-humanised him - you know reduced him to something less that a valid human being - in your estimation. (Although you are trying to persuade us all to your position)

Those are the things that have me reaching for my DSM V. Also that you have chosen to weave so much shame into your assassination of this man's character, is IMHO revealing.


edit on 29-9-2014 by the golden ray because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2014 @ 01:14 AM
link   
I read your explanation of why you see a sociopath here, and I watched the video again, wondering what I am missing.

My half brother is a sociopath and narcissistic personality disorder, and sometimes I find people who immediately tell me the same thing about them, because of body language and behavior. (there was recently a video someone put up of a so-called whistle blower on alien stuff, and I saw those traits in the first few seconds, had to fight the urge to stop watching the video and disregard anything he says right away).

But this kid, I don't see it.

What I DO see is- the fellow interviewing him is showing a lot of emotional force, and using provocative statements from the get go, that are usually what is used to poke someone into responding emotionally. It is used to raise the discussion out of rational thought into emotional exchange- and the kid doesn't take the bait. He remains neutral emotionally.

Now, I see that this often makes people very frustrated. They feel like they are not "connecting" with you, they feel like you are not "getting" them. So the conclusion is often "you don't care about others".

It seems someone else in this thread has refered to me in particular as stirring this type of reaction in them before.

But from someone who often discusses topics in this sort of way- not using emotion, but logic and reason instead, allow me to give some insight into WHY I do this.

I am not insensitive to others, on the contrary, I am very sensitive to others. I am very empathic. On the other hand, because I am easily impacted by the emotions of others, i do not completely trust my emotions to make judgements for me. They tend to change quickly and often according to who I am faced with, and circumstances. They tend to give good or bad judgements, sometimes without logical reason, or according to my moods, the moods of others, or my personal preferences (that person is "bad" because they don't have the same opinion as me, the other is "good" because they have the same).

The create extreme view of others, that will sometimes block my ability to be receptive and listen to them. This seems unfair to my critical mind, and a folly- because there is always something to be learned from everyone, if you are paying attention.

I also find that people can be swayed by strong emotion- they can be made to adopt completely unreasonable opinions or beliefs through the use of emotion. God, I know a woman who can get a whole room agreeing with her just because she yells at the drop of a hat, and lectures dramatically- will get up at the dinner table and pound it and point fingers at your chest, and next thing you know, everyone is nodding their head, as a physical reaction to the ease the discomfort she is creating. She absolutely loses it with my calm quiet demeanor, and when she tries to turn my opinion and I quietly respond with a perfectly logical reasoning.

No matter if I respectfully acknowledge some of her points and her feelings, she doesn't hear those because she is in her emotional state- looking for absolute submission, not half way.



It is not clear to me that this kid isn't "getting" the emotional content being expressed towards him by the man interviewing him- he is not failing to feel it, he is simply choosing to not let it lead his thoughts and arguments.

Now, I see the argument that a person who isn't using their emotional connection to others as a lead for their choice of behavior could be dangerous with a gun.

I offer the counter argument that a person who is lead by their emotions could be just as dangerous, precisely because of that tendancy to separate the world and people into good and bad in extreme ways.

The interviewer said, "I don't know if you are friend or foe".... which pretty well describes his frustration with not getting that dedication to being "with me" or "against me". The more people are used to relying on emotional manipulation to dominate others, the more this is infuriating. They want to determine bad guys from good guys, and bad guys are okay to shoot, and okay to feel nothing for.

My thinking is that no one is a good guy or bad guy, we are just different people with different viewpoints to share, compare and contrast. That is what, in my mind, makes up a society. Emotions have their appropriate contexts for leading the way, with people who have built some trust between them- trust that the other will not try to manipulate them against their will. But that is not the case with everyone you run into.
edit on 29-9-2014 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2014 @ 02:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Astrocyte
It makes me want to say "what the hell is wrong with you? Why? Why do you want all these things"? And then he would tell me; but in telling me he would only be giving verbal narration to that unverbalizable "feeling tone" that underlies his experience of the world. It is this - particularly unempathic - perception
,

I would like to emphasize this part of your post.

"What the hell is wrong with you???" is an emotion trigger- much like the one the interviewer used at the start, by saying "I don't buy your Bullsh*t".

They indicate lack of respect and personal insult, which is supposed to get the other mad, emotionally charged.... reflecting back the anger or emotion of the interviewer.

Because he does not get mad, (he did explain why he wants these things, he answered the question, ignoring the emotional button pushing attempt), it increases your perception that he is not "getting" the emotions of the interviewer. Your conclusion here is that he is unable to- I suggest he is able to, but has chosen not to make this particular exchange an emotional one.

This is not a bonding moment between friends, this is supposed to be an exchange of ideas between people who do not have a relationship already constructed, so I think that is a civilized choice. Emotional exchanges between strangers can quickly become volatile. -Probably a good argument why people who are very dependent upon emotional manipulation should not have guns!
.




afterall, our cognitions about others, if not reflected upon and analyzed, are often based upon our own affective experiences of the world).


This was a very insightful and important remark.

edit on 29-9-2014 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2014 @ 02:11 AM
link   
Screw the affective experiences of the world and my perceptions of such. Sorry. But my take on this is a sociopath is a sociopath. I was married to one, once. I know them pretty well. They are usually successful, at well, anything they want to be successful at.

The problem is, what they''ll do when they think no one is looking, or others approve. And in my experience, this can be quite awful.

I like to live life by the mantra that I would not do to anyone what I wouldn't have done to me…..this is not how a sociopath lives. Sympathy for that?

Hmmmm. I don't think so.
Regards,
tetra



posted on Sep, 29 2014 @ 02:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluesma
a person who is lead by their emotions could be just as dangerous

Exactly, and then some.
Psychopaths and sociopaths actually have extreme degrees of
feelings and emotions; problem is it's ALWAYS SELF-CENTERED.
A kid that gets what he demands by having
tantrums and manipulating the parents,
grows to be a psychopath if not put in his place at a early stage.
Sociopaths and psychopaths have an unethical sense of entitlement
based only on their feelings, regardless of the rest of the world.

Sympathy ? Sympathy enables the psychopaths, then you might as well be one.
Confronting them up front is what needs to be done, even if it
has no effect on them, as in most cases.



_

edit on 29/9/14 by ToneDeaf because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2014 @ 03:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: ToneDeaf

Sympathy ? Sympathy enables the psychopaths, then you might as well be one.
Confronting them up front is what needs to be done, even if it
has no effect on them, as in most cases.


First of all, I agree with the first part of your post.

Second- I disagree with this part.

What I suspect you are actually refering to is the manifestation of your sympathy to them overiding your judgement of the situation or issue at hand!

I feel sympathy for the person I disagree with who is feeling very emotionally invested. The person who tries to debate using emotional button pushing- I feel their emotion, whether it be anger, fear, sadness, injustice, pain.....

I feel sympathy for that. I feel sympathy for my brothers pain and anger, even if it stems from an overblown sense of entitlement and ego- no matter where those feelings come from they are still painful for him, and I am touched by them. I am saddened that he is suffering.

That does not erase the simultaneous focus upon logic, reality and reason. It does not make me do what he wants, agree with what he wants me to agree to, or to allow him to do whatever he wants. There is no danger in feeling sympathy- even for a sociopath.

I can still say, "I hear your frustration/pain/anger.... I am saddened that you are going through that. That does not change the facts here, it does not change my mind on this subject matter."

Most likely, that verbal acknowledgement will not be enough. Even sympathetic eyes and tone of voice will not be enough to appease them. They want you to not talk about the anger you are picking up from them, they want you to BECOME it. Defend, attack, raise your voice, cry, lower your eyes, and assume the position of submission, or stick out the chest and be as hostile as they feel. let their emotions possess you and overide your mind.

It is not in feeling sympathy that you enable a narcissistic sociopath, it is letting that dominate your choices of being.
edit on 29-9-2014 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2014 @ 04:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluesmalet their emotions possess you and overide your mind.

Say what ?


An act of ethical means is not founded on 'feelings' or
emotions but wisdom; psychopathic serial killers will
tell you otherwise .
Self-centered possessed feelings IS the
problem with psychopaths, it fans their self-focus.
Encouragement to connect with their feelings only expedites the situation,
since they can not relate out side their 'bubble'.
In turn they will prey/play on your emotions if you enable their game.
Psychopaths are NOT curable, they believe that they are legends at
least in their own little minds.

_






edit on 29/9/14 by ToneDeaf because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2014 @ 04:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: ToneDeaf

An act of ethical means is not founded on 'feelings' or
emotions but wisdom


Agreed.




Self-centered possessed feelings IS the
problem with psychopaths, it directs them so much so that
they can not relate.
Any attempt will be blocked out, they will
prey/play on your emotions if you enable their game.
psychopaths are NOT curable, the are legends in their own little minds.



Agreed again.

I'm not proposing any "cure". I am explaining how I personally avoid being a victim of them and enabling them.

I repeat though- it is not because you feel sympathy for them
that that sympathy need overide your sense of reason, or choice of act.

It is not either/or. You can "feel" it and refuse to "submit" to it, or identify with it.

The premise of your argument seems to be "feel any emotional empathy for them, and you have lost your will, and shall then be victimized by them."

You do realize that is the prevailing view a sociopath has, and why they cut themselves off from feeling sympathy or empathy for others????



posted on Sep, 29 2014 @ 05:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluesma
and why they cut themselves off from feeling sympathy or empathy for others????

There is no 'why' "they cut themselves off from feeling sympathy", they
have none to begin with and never will,
since they are already so self-absorbed.
Not submitting to them is one issue, not fanning their ego is another,
anything else unfortunately end up enabling.
Sympathy is their bait, that is how serial killers get their victims.

_



posted on Sep, 29 2014 @ 05:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Astrocyte
Even as I write this I know many (perhaps most, this is a conspiracy site afterall) will read this and be vicerally turned off; something about what I'm writing annoys them.


If it helps, I can solve this particular mystery for you very easily. "Vicerally".

I come into contact with psychiatrists and psychologists all day long. The best ones can say everything that you have just said, without ever using a word that isn't in common usage. Or "in ubiquitous parlance", as you may prefer to phrase it.

If anyone is getting annoyed, it's not because of what you are saying. It's the way that you are saying it. You're not writing for an academic audience with the same background and knowledge as you; language needs to be suitably adjusted to compensate otherwise people start to write you off as being pretentious.

It might seem horribly unfair to say this, but once people start to apply a liberal sprinkling of magic words to a post, they increasingly sound like someone desperate to appear more educated than they really are.

A tip from an old teacher long ago - your ability to understand a subject isn't measured by how much you can say on the subject, but how well you can explain it to someone without background knowledge of the subject.



posted on Sep, 29 2014 @ 05:21 AM
link   
double post. Sorry.
edit on 29-9-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join