reply to post by dracodie
parts of your (very lucid) self-description do correspond to what is usually classified as "sociopathy". (And your empathy towards animals reveals a
reassuring lack of psycho
However, your apparent lack of emotional response may not necessarily be
a "bad" thing. In oriental philosophy/theology "impassibility" is considered a great virtue. (But it is also true, of course, that such
impassibility precludes rage or bellicosity of any kind.)
You may find it useful to discuss this with a few good therapists. (I say "a few" for a reason: it's always good to have a "second opinion" in
medical matters, and in psychological matters doubly so.)
But do not fret TOO much.
Your experience (and self-expression, BTW) reminds me very much of somebody I know very well. It may be of comfort to you to know that this person
evolved into an extraordinary human being from her late 20s on.
She still doesn't "feel" as strongly as she "should" (please, note the quotation marks) in many situations that are supposed
tears, for example. But I feel it's safe to say that, in her case - and perhaps in yours, too - that is only a sign of a healthy detachment - which,
by the way, includes an ability to act and help effectively in situations where others are overwhelmed by "emotion".
As far as lying is concerned, I can tell you that she found a moral
approach - rather than a guilt-induced (i.e. emotional) one - to be of
great help. What's more, by developing - intellectually, at first - a stance that other people should not be lied to because she has no RIGHT to
mislead them, it seems that, in the long term, this actually helped her develop a very strong emotional empathy, in the sense that she now feels
emotionally about other people's RIGHTS (rather than about them
) and about her own RESPONSIBILITY towards other people.
In other words, do not be too worried because of the absence of emotion.
But do continue your introspection - and have a word with a few really good therapists.