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.

 

Should we have compassion for psychopaths?

page: 4
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthParadox
 


I'm curious if you believe in evil at all. If a psychopath isn't evil, who is?

I'm forgetting the exact quote, but I've heard that the real evil is not...., but the indifference between good and evil. I think many people are apathetic today, and not willing to take responsibilty for their own evil actions, intentions, so they become blind to it in other people.

Evil, is really easy for me to define. I don't think of it as an absolute condemnation. I equate evil with selfishness. Everyone has evil and good within them. I see psychopaths as being nearly entirely, or perhaps entirely evil, selfish. Maybe I should retract that statement. Psychopaths may in fact have no good, save their ability for others to learn from their wrongdoings. The ability to see good from its opposite. Evil.




posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   
The thing about having compassion for psychopaths is that... what are you going to do? Feel sorry for them, and let them destroy every social foundation we have? Knowing that they are beyond recovery, and indeed are something different than human, and very dangerous... what is the compassive thing to do? Kill them? Put them in jail? Pack them all and send them to an isolated island?

I don't see a "good" solution. And they have the power. In other words, we're screwed by the very humanity we have and they abuse.



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by unityemissions
I just got through a heated discussion with a friend. We had to stop because the differences were too much, and the tones were escalating with each passing word.

We were talking about psychopaths. I have come to understand psychopaths as being inhumane people. I'm not talking about a secondary psychopath, I'm talking about the real deal.

Here's why I see them like this. To my understanding, a psychopath has the perspective that only they exist!


Well, you have to define your terms like the American Psychiatric Association does in the approx 900 pages of the DSM. But, they have to keep revising it because all of them keep changing their minds. They currently have revisions in the works for the Fifth Edition. Anyone who goes for the various types of licensing available to be a mental health practitioner according to the laws of the state in which they live (in the US) needs to intimately understand the numerous forms of psychopathology that are defined in the DSM. Such people are encouraged to receive mental health treatment themselves, because you need it when you deal with the people who meet the criteria for diagnosis under the DSM. IMO, dealing with people who ask for help demands the practitioner to get help themselves if they are going to be any real help.

But therein lies a rub. Any one seeking help receives their own diagnosis, which in this age of zero privacy, one then is also labeled as some kind of nut-case. The bureaucrats who administer the "gate-keeping" of who gets a new license are in some kind of ethereal zone where they get to keep the actual results of licensee exams private among themselves, AND are adverse to EVER get any mental health treatment of -their- own because it would be bad for their bureaucratic careers.

In the professional jargon, practitioners like to use the term "socio-path" as the kind of person who cares not for the lives of others and is willing to kill people for their own sick satisfaction. Yet, "socio-path" is not a term even used in the DSM.

But, someone with a "mental health history" is forever marked with this oxymoron terminology. "Mental Health' is an oxymoron, because if one has been treated for mental health, they are automatically categorized as "some kind of psycho-path".

Let me tell you, this is not a very happy time for people trying to get licenses. One must first complete an approved Post-Graduate curriculum and well over three thousand hours (on the average) of supervised clinical work.

Then and only then, may they apply to take an exam (or series of exams) on fire-walled computers, submit their answers, often with a feeling of having "aced" the exam. And they may or may not get a passing score, with no accountability for the answers they gave, and no process of appeal. Isn't that just Dandy!



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by seb2882
 


I'm right there with you. The conclusion as of late is that psychopaths are incapable of comprehending humanity and acting accordingly of their own free will, so they should at least be empathized with a little. By empathy I mean gaining an understanding into how they experience the world, if only to avoid the many downfalls of interacting with these people. Compassion is a strong desire to alleviate someone's suffering. This is pointless with a psychopath. No true suffering to alleviate! They're fine and dandy with the way they are!

I think this finally ends my thoughts on the subject. All I really had to do was look at the definition of compassion a little closer. Geez, I'm dumb at times!



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by unityemissions
reply to post by TruthParadox
 


I'm curious if you believe in evil at all. If a psychopath isn't evil, who is?


People Like Madoff are evil. But i have never heard of anyone mentioning him of having any form of psychopathology (BTW - many forms of psychopathology defined by the APA are of the types who are more likely to harm themselves than others - but many are of the type who do harm to others - with no sense of remorse, purpose or humanity of any kind)

Just about any person walking around the planet, if assessed by a competent mental health professional, would exhibit diagnostic impressions that could indicate some form of psychopathology, even if they were in the more benign codes that you can not treat under most insurance plans.

Defining "compassion" and "empathy" in English are fairly straightforward tasks. Then again, in different contexts, they are harder to understand.



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 01:38 PM
link   
I think that we ought to show compassion toward those and only those people who are deserving of it.



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by unityemissions
reply to post by seb2882
 


I'm right there with you. The conclusion as of late is that psychopaths are incapable of comprehending humanity and acting accordingly of their own free will, so they should at least be empathized with a little. By empathy I mean gaining an understanding into how they experience the world, if only to avoid the many downfalls of interacting with these people. Compassion is a strong desire to alleviate someone's suffering. This is pointless with a psychopath. No true suffering to alleviate! They're fine and dandy with the way they are!

I think this finally ends my thoughts on the subject. All I really had to do was look at the definition of compassion a little closer. Geez, I'm dumb at times!


If they are "mindless" in that sense, then I would be unable to categorize them as people. Or as human. Unless, of course, you want to designate "human" as an upright bi-pedal creature with speech. Then, there is no qualification of cognition.



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by akalepos
 


I consider them people, but distinct from humanity. Not humane, but nonetheless people. Guess it becomes a matter of semantics at some point. The defining factor is that they're without conscience, so define them as you will.



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 04:11 PM
link   
I get ya there.

I have always maintained a distinction of my own that there is the animal homosapienssapiens and then there are human beings.

I don't do this to be mean. I sort of obtained that opinion from observation. An easy way to say it is that some people genuinely seem to not have the ability to think. They rather "emote", I would say.



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 05:00 PM
link   
We have to, as otherwise we become for that moment just like them.

It is difficult OP for us to do this, but an aspiration and goal, and the entire answer and a shining example is found below, in addition is based on your entire question. The full 10 minutes is worth watching but to just answer your question, and how one remarkable man, who was a victim of one and who was able to is shown in the below video from 4mins 45 seconds:



Very awe inspiring that such a man as in the video was humbled by this persons experience.

Kind regards,

Elf



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by MischeviousElf
 


Sorry I'm waiting for the video to load before watching it, but just have to comment on your first line. I can't make a lick of sense out of it. Please enlighten me. How is it, if I don't try to help someone who is incapable of help (act compassionately for a conscienceless beast), I become them?!

I still have a yearning to help everyone who is willing and capable of growth.

I have a conscience, which tells me to respect and love all life, truth, and goodness. I do respect that they are living people. I understand that they care not for truth, or goodness.

How am I to become psychopathic by accepting that they can't be helped, and accordingly not being compassionate?

[edit on 15-3-2009 by unityemissions]



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 06:02 PM
link   
After watching the video, I thought a bit more about this. I don't think our views are so different, except perhaps the definition of compassion. The are basically equating compassion with love. I think it's a bit different here in the west.

You could say all emotions root from either love, or the lack of (fear). Still, we do have labels for other emotions that provide a more dynamic view of emotions as a whole.

If compassion is to be understood as the desire to relieve anothers suffering stemming from a deep sense of empathy, surely we could see this is inapplicable towards a true psychopath.

Empathy, is the ability to see from another persons perspective. From their perspective, once again, there's nothing to be relived of. I think I'm beginning to sound a bit like a broken record, so I'll just stop here, unless anyone wants to continue this discussion further.

I've reached the understanding needed to move on.



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 04:09 AM
link   
Unfortunately, you would have to be the victim of a phsychopath to really understand the severity of the damage one can cause.

I keep my empathy for their victims, who are competant, hard working and cooperative, spirited and thoughtfull. I defend the helpless from their claws. So should anyone with a conscience.

Anyone who needs to cheat, steal, lie, and hurt others has a bad soul, and should be abandoned, shunned, some exterminated.

These demons have been conditioned, excused and even rewarded since childhood for their grotesque behavior. Some religions are a breeding ground for their victims.

By what I have witnessed and experienced I would have to say that a very small percentage of the population is not phsychopathic. Thats how bad it is.


[edit on 16-3-2009 by HulaAnglers]



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by HulaAnglers
 


I went back over this thread and read all of your posts. Thanks for all the videos and input. I think you really understand this situation. Especially since you have personally dealt with this matter in the family...

Most people are self, or group centered. I think this correlates with psychopathic, and sociopathic behavior.

Very few are those whose "group" is humanity as a whole, or even further reaching towards a cosmic-type of perspective.

Interestingly, as I've come to terms with this, my judgment has subsided, and my view of people has changed. I'm keeping my ability to properly (at least hopefully) discern right from wrong, while not holding onto the negative vibrations.

All I see the need for is to know whether it's worth it or not for me to interact with X, or enter X situation. It's really strange. Before I entered this state, all I noticed was evil surrounding me, but now it's like I've got my bubble of goodness that seems hard for even the most foul energies to penetrate.

I think this had to do with the fact that a little bit of evil was allowed to bounce around in my head wondering why most people are so evil! A bit insane and hypocritical, now that I'm outside looking in at it.

It's still there (extreme selfishness), mostly surrounding me, in the high-income suburban area I live around, but I'm simply not feeding it. Just observing.



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by HulaAnglers

Anyone who needs to cheat, steal, lie, and hurt others has a bad soul, and should be abandoned, shunned, some exterminated.


Have you never lied? (even to yourself about motivation?)
Cheated?
Stole (even love, attention etc)
Has anyone ever been hurt by your words or actions?
Ever hurt yourself by your actions? youve never had guilt?

If you can truly answer no to these questions I will gladly try and link up with you, you have much to teach humanity, and help me on my spiritual path.

Kind Regards,

Elf



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by MischeviousElf
 


I think the key word HulaAnglers mentioned was AND. They MUST be this way because they don't experience love, light, however you would put it. They gain their energy from being malicious. It's their driving force in life.

Everyone lies to some extent, in someone else's eyes. It's not if you have or have not done it. It's intent. Why did someone lie? Was it to simplify, better a situation, or to benefit you only? Not only this, but do you do this habitually, or just when it really seems necessary?

I don't think his words weren't meant to be taken literally like that. Society dictates that everyone lie, at least once in a while.



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by MischeviousElf


Have you never lied? (even to yourself about motivation?)
Cheated?
Stole (even love, attention etc)
Has anyone ever been hurt by your words or actions?
Ever hurt yourself by your actions? youve never had guilt?





MischeviousElf, of course I had to lie a few times in my life, never to get someone else into trouble though. More to free myself from another's lie.

Cheat, mayby before the age of six, I really tried to be like other children but my conscience made me feel bad. It was not in my nature.

I have a lot of talent and knowledge, can make anything, from anything tastefully, so personally I play by the rules and do the best I can.

I guess my spirit and good common sense, my focus on the whole, my sincerity, tork and good looks, I have been told made others suffer in jealousy, but I knew this and became a catalyst in their own development. A good friend, but it was not enough for them to be proud of their new found creativity, they have to anihilate the other, they can't help it.


Personally, I see the human race has been kept in involution by greedy saddistic perverted entities. They must rape and destroy all that is pure and beautiful.

Most of my life has been spent, in worry and danger, it has interfered with my own development I have no guilt to carry, I am innocent, but I am struggling with my unquenched hatred, until I see some true justice happening. The game is too uneven, look at what the chinese are doing to the Tibetans and Falun Dafa practitioners. It is truly sad to see such gentle people treated with such animosity. Too sad.

[edit on 16-3-2009 by HulaAnglers]



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   
If what we were discussing was "eliminating psychopaths", then I do not know where "compassion" would really have good fit.

I also would not buy into the folk psychology that says: "were we to do that we would be like them".

I maintain the soft idea that if all "good people" rose up and killed off all "bad people", they would not be like the "bad people".

Why?

Because if all "bad people" decided to wipe out all "good people", they wouldn't know when to stop.

The difference seems to be in the mental states involved, intention, and the goal involved.

Throwing up the imaginary boogie man that if we actually did something about that we would become like them is equivalent to saying that we ought to lay back while they steamroller us. It is a mere twisting of the logic and is more rhetorical than meaningful.

Concepts are merely concepts. The Dalai Lama's efforts to restore Tibet as a sovereign nation have clearly been a failure. I did not say I didn't admire the guy, I am simply saying that the policy hasn't worked and will not work.

I just sort of think that "having compassion" for the compassionless, is a waste of energy. The psychopath would take the boon happily and never return it in kind. So if you want to stay eternally locked in the user/abuser paradigm where the "takers" keep taking from the "givers" then in essence: You will always get what you always got. (more folk psychology)

But the sort of ultimate question asked here is: Should we extend compassion to the compassionless psychopath?

If we find that we should, then we need to know also: To what extent, under what conditions, at what amount, and where we would like to draw the line.

[edit on 16-3-2009 by akalepos]

[edit on 16-3-2009 by akalepos]



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by unityemissions
 



Hello Unity, I wanted to share something precious and you are my chosen recipient. I have just reconnected with my younger sister, who(I found out) went through even more abuse than I did. She has a good nature, and also creative, but fell into the drug trap for 5yrs, she is done with it and I decided to become her mother, its never too late to give love to children even if she is over 30, she is responding so well and doing better than ever. By surrounding ourselves with people who are "calm and aware", we both have a chance to heal now, and it is so apreciated. Her love has also given me new breath. Just wanted to share some positive vibes, thank you Unity



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   
have you ever?

is meaningless compared to: do you now?

have you ever? invokes ideas like: once an "x", always an "x".

if the latter is a maxim, then no people ever learn from their mistakes and then change.

is that what you want to say?

as for me, I cannot allow a fallacy to be a maxim.

It is easy to point fingers at past deeds but it is overtly meaningless in the overall scale of "being".

[edit on 16-3-2009 by akalepos]



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join