SkinRipper here.

page: 6
22
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
The impression I got from the OP and his responses to challenging posters is that he tries very hard to project a persona based on his idea of what a psychopath is like from books he read and movies he watched.
To me, he comes across as an average Joe with a superiority complex, in need of attention and admiration.
In other words: a common-or-garden-variety narcissist.




posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
No empathy? You should be in government. Hehe Only joking


Welcome to ATS



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
the result of a cruel unfair world without one that rules..





We all been thru this before..


I'll be waitin for you. Not always of course..



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Hi there, i don't have a strong opinion on this, as i don't know anyone who would be diagnosed with this, but this is what i find to be somewhat hard to diagnose properly.. just because, i am very calm, social person, i like what i do, i don't care much about bout anything, but if someone did something bad to those who are close to me, i couldn't just sit and not do anything about it, so does that make ma a psycho too? I don't know, and i better don't find out either, anyway, Happy New Year to everyone here



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSkinRipper

I have officially been diagnosed as a textbook Psychopath. It is classed as a personality disorder or antisocial personality disorder




I have personally taken care of medically diagnosed patients that are Antisocial(301.7).
There is a general pattern called psychopathy, but not a diagnosis (strike 1). The DSM-IV-TR is what we use in our profession for mental diagnosis.
Perhaps Borderline is more fitting, I don't know, because I have only the information that you have written.
What you have written states that you love your wife. The essential feature of Antisocial Personality Disorder is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood. You write that you love your wife (strike 2).
You also state,"I am very logical as I base non of my decisions on feeling or emotion, although it does not mean that every decision I make will be right. It means that I do more that others offer a view with pure logic (My logic that is). " However, this basically goes against Criterion A3. Decisions are made on the spur of the moment, without forethought, and without consideration for the consequences to self or others...(strike 3).
Perhaps you have a more nefarious agenda here than what you reveal. Only time will tell.
We'll be watching you.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Trublbrwing
 


You're behavior has nothing to do with anger or strength...
or hatred or love, but it is solely a product of your conditioning.
Just as your wife's behavior relating to her sister was due to her conditioning.

You should check out the work done by Jean Piaget.

This is not evolutionary survival of the fittest work in action folks.
It is just as easy to set up a more practical and efficient model for evolution using cooperation as the basis rather than competition.
What each person experiences and in turn behaves is mostly shaped by their environment in their youth.
This was the nature of Jean Piaget's studies.
If your behavior of making your wife want to hate you causes more personal distress between you and your wife then a shrink who was Freudian in nature would try to elicit your feelings out of you and toward your wife through a mediator.
It's called talk therapy, basically, and it is unusually effective.
(a sort of Rogerian therapy for all those Psych. geeks out there)

Please....
Movies, television shows, and books, like Fight Club, American Psycho, and Dexter, all condition people.

While they may be presenting some sort of artful critique on the American psyche, they are tools that condition people to more violence.
This is the exact same thing that happened with homosexuality.
I am not making a debate about this issue and I do not condemn anyone for engaging in homosexual behaviors.
What I am stating is exactly what happened to condition the population into accepting homosexuality as a normal behavior and not a learning disability.

Homosexuality was qualified as a paraphilia in the DSM until the middle 70's. Right along side pedophilia.
As a matter of fact, it was illegal and very jailable to engage in homosexual activity.

But the 70's changed that.
And a lot of that was due to television.
Three's Company.... The Hollywood Squares...Hello Paul Lynde from the Match Game...Liberace.
I think that you get the picture.

The reason that this is even a topic is because we live in a military/industrial/prison/propaganda matrix.
And these personality traits are profitable.

The homosexual normalization of America had one point. Population reduction.
It is no accident that this occurred right along side Roe v. Wade and the Feminist movement.

When people truly understand what the government learned from people like Edward Bernays, BF Skinner, Albert Bandura, and Abraham Maslow, then the eyes of reality pop open and will never be shut.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by jeanvaljean
 
I share your doubts.

Also this reference really jarred with my suspension of disbelief...



In one video I was show a Nanny dropping and kicking a 18 month old baby. My brain did not register any form of empathy or shock. My brain processes info differently to normal people.


Was the 'nanny' wearing a badge or T-shirt that identified him/her as a nanny? Did the baby have a 'Happy 18 month birthday' badge? Who filmed it?



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Violater1
 


Ahhh.... A fellow amongst the thread.

If you have read my comments, then you will know that I am heartily AGAINST the DSM.

And I will tell you why...

Because ALL 5 AXES must be qualified in order to meet any condition and the first two axes are not in any way actually testable.
Well, except axis II down's syndrome, but that would make more sense to be axis III in my opinion.

The majority (and I would go 99% here) of all personal problems can be traced to Axis III, IV, or V.
The first two axes are symptoms of a serious problem that is occurring in the last three...

Do you agree with this or disagree?



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   
After reading your original post again, Skinripper, I can see you were only being very honest and open concerning your diagnosis and some of the points you have made, I do agree with. Some people can be very emotional, which isn't in their favor in the work environment. Obviously, you don't completely agree with the diagnosis you have been labeled with, because you 'love' your wife. Great! I still don't understand why there is the necessity of having a wife in your work field. A wife, of course, could make you look good and be wonderful companionship and also fill other needs, but is she actually necessary to your success? I can't help feeling that she fills another need you aren't aware of. I'm not judging, so no need for defense mode, lol.

Everyone has their own experiences of love, but we really can't define love. The majority of the male population has been brought up to suppress those feelings of love in the public eye and we live in a left-brain dominated world and dominated by the male species, lol. Maybe, we'll have a female president this time around.

I shouldn't allow my emotions to get the better of me. I'm always telling myself that, lol. I can see the logic in it. This is my form of apology. I hope you enter conversations on ATS and bring more lively discussion.

I'm female, by the way.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by TheSkinRipper
 


I have the same diagnosis as you say you do. I have to say, you act like you don't want people to see you as a potential criminal, but the selection of your screen name says different. I think you like the shock value, and want to come off as a "Psychopath" without really saying so. Hence, you give us the information in your introduction, hoping that we'll connect the dots ourselves and you will still look legitimate. Just my two cents, and I may be wrong. However, i've seen this many times before.


-B



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by IrishLass
I have been reading all the posts in this thread. And from what you have written SkinRipper is that you are a huge fan of "Dexter". Much of what you have posted here is in the books by Jeff Lindsay. "Dearly Devoted Dexter", "Dexter by Design". "Dexter in the Dark" and of course the first book on Dexter, "Darkly Dreaming Dexter". Yes you tweaked some of the words but your OP reads like a book on Dexter.

BTW, I am a huge fan of Dexter.



WIN.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Josephus23
 


"If your behavior of making your wife want to hate you causes more personal distress between you and your wife then a shrink who was Freudian in nature would try to elicit your feelings out of you and toward your wife through a mediator."

You weren't listening, like most you skimmed the post, picked out what made sense to you and replied. I was not talking about my wife's sister, that was someone else, I was talking about her father.
I have no desire to make my wife hate me at present, our relationship is decades old and pretty solid. What I said was to help her deal with my demise and avoid the emotional stress it makes sense to cut the emotional umbilical cord if death is imminent.
I don't need a shrink to help me think this through, I've already done the math. Death touches EVERYONE, people deal with it in different ways and some have a harder time with it than others. If I can take some of the sting out of it for her it helps us both. Simple, logical and effective.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   
just because you can imagine it does not mean you actually believe it, is stephen king, quentin tarintino, mary shelley, ect. any more or less psychotic that skin ripper here? no, they are much more imaginative & talented than this OP. and to folks that claim they are unfazed by horror or gore content i would challenge you to look at real videos such as 3 guys 1 hammer, iraqi war footage, or footage taken in the sudanese and or congolese civil wars.
i enjoy horror films such as saw1,2,3, hostel, friday the 13th series, but i really cannot stomach or even watch even 10 second into any real footage of real killings. there is a big difference between theatrics and the real deal. maybe i should post the links for these content if any one wants to try it a a litmus test for their own pathology and see how you handle.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   
TheSkinRipper,

If your OP and subsequent posts are genuine (I have my doubts), I'm curious if your doctor/therapists have addressed your Narcissistic personality disorder as well?

Since you haven't mentioned it yet, I'm assuming you also haven't noticed you have NPD?

Sorry to break the news to you, if it is in fact new to you.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by TheSkinRipper
 
I too believe everyone is capable of using violence on others, though to what extent for most folk, myself included, depends on the circumstances that cause it to surface. During my many years of riding motorcycles, I have on more than one occasion been presented with reasons never to trust most police if I'm looking for honest justice. I am now sixty, and for the past forty one years my rule to live by has been "Paybacks are a bitch!". I don't have much use for my fellow human beings, but I do love kids. It's a shame they turn into adults. I don't give a rat's arse what others do with their lives unless they are hurting kids or dogs. I mind my own business and expect the same of others, but I do have one question for you...Why the name "SkinRipper" ?
Anyway, welcome to the site!



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Josephus23
 


I have to disagree with you to some extent on fMRIs - as they are being shown to be a useful diagnostic tool in certain circumstances, especially in concern to illness that affects the brain. To dismiss them as "crap" concerns me, as a academic you should be somewhat more open in your presentation then just referring to them as crap. They might not tell you what the brain is "thinking" but they certainly can be used as a measure of response to pain - as in physical pain.

I applaud your position here as a person pursuing and advanced degree, but sometimes when we study an area to the exclusion of others we tend to look down the paper towel tube so to speak and not see what else is around us. While a foundation in the old masters is essential Freud is a bit outdated. What exactly are you researching?

I am very aware of Stanley Milgram.

The MMPI is used as a tool in hiring process, in some states as a requirement for Law Enforcement. It must be carefully read according to group or type and therefore can be questioned but it is a screening tool that has been used for years despite that. I know for a FACT psychological testing/screening is conducted to accertain compatability for certain military positions. It doesn't take a big leap to see what could happen if they took the science behind crew resourse management to the extreme . . . but this doesn't sound like the type of research you are involved with.

I think the nurture/vs/nature arguement is being proven in part with genetics - something that has to be considered in any pursuit of mental health studies or human behavioral patterns. While some behaviors can be taught, as in teaching the person with austism/aspergers how to "behave" despite how they "feel" so as to more sucessfully intigrate into society - there are certain brain abnormalities and damage that cannot be explained or fixed with cognitive or behavioral modification methods. Genetics and genetic disposition is an area that is becoming more difficult to debate, and something we continue to expand on almost daily. These types of tools were not available to the "old masters" so they simplified the language of this concept down to Nature/vs/Nurture. It is obviously a very complex combination of both.

I would like to know your opionion on attachment disorder in regard to this topic. . . frightening and real which is has a "nurturing" cause - at an extremely early stage in human development. So, while the OP suggests that his parents were loving and nuturing, if his mother suffered Post Partum and his needs were not met during very early development attachment disorder could have been the subsequent result. This could have gone un-noticed. Attachment disorder and the subsequent brain damage that develops as a result, goes far beyond the development of narcissisit personality disorder (usually a male diagnosis) or border line personality disorder (female version) which usually develop over time due to abusive environments - again an "nuture" cause but one that might still have hope in treatment modalities. Attachment disorder may also have genetic and cultural basis - or repeat in families, so the behavioral modification that could have changed the resulting situation needed to occur in very early parenting and be supported by the culture.

Finally just this year I became aware of changes being made to the DSM ~ to the diagnosis of PTSD in particular, which should and could be another thread completely. I was a firm sort of believer of most mental health professions until I became aware of the politics of the DSM. I have serious doubts that have arisen about the field in light of these discoveries.

I enjoy your posts, and your illumination on these topics - but an "appeal to experts" with a list of known professionals and historical figures in a field that is still in my opionion and "emerging field" and one that must definately come out of the "old box" . . . is not helpful to my understanding of this subject, nor is dismissing tools that may have some measurable value as a bunch of crap.
edit on 1-1-2011 by TheBirdisDone because: spelling



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by jeanvaljean
The impression I got from the OP and his responses to challenging posters is that he tries very hard to project a persona based on his idea of what a psychopath is like from books he read and movies he watched.
To me, he comes across as an average Joe with a superiority complex, in need of attention and admiration.
In other words: a common-or-garden-variety narcissist.




Totally agree.

His "story" and the "Symptoms" he lists are just stereotypes and things he's read.


This thread is actually ridiculous.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 03:57 PM
link   
Meditation will help you get in touch with who you are inside, and to be able to do the work you came to do, reach the next grade in this earth school. Emotions aren't crucial, though they can help connect us to our Love and Ligtht/Consciousness/Soul.

A very quick and simple meditation that doesn"t take years of practice or breath training is:
--sit, or lie down.
--close your eyes, and picture within you and endless Infinity of which you are a part of, and you are equal to the all infinite parts within this infinity. There is no time, no bigger/smaller, higher/lower, past/future, only endless Non-Locality. Your portion is endless progressing Consciousness/Soul/Intellect/Light.
--reach into your infinite self, in the infinite now within. Greet all that is True Love, though you don't feel that for everyone. Doesn't matter. Intent is good.
--ask for your purpose and reason, ask how to free your mind and help others. ask for healing, mind/body/soul, and for eyes to see positive. don't ask about the emotions or sociopathy unless its on your mind to do so, just healing of insight, awareness, to wake up more.
--thank all that is True Love and ask for insight throughout the day, and in sleep.

You can also picture flying through the infinite cosmos inside you, while you grow to encompass it in size, like superman growing bigger and bigger, asking how to help, reporting for duty.

I think all who seek find. And I think anyone can seek, with whatever makeup they have, no matter answers they give on these kind of tests.

This is irrelevant. But its logical to seek the purpose in things and to seek to progress.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Josephus23
reply to post by Violater1
 


Ahhh.... A fellow amongst the thread.

If you have read my comments, then you will know that I am heartily AGAINST the DSM.

And I will tell you why...

Because ALL 5 AXES must be qualified in order to meet any condition and the first two axes are not in any way actually testable.
Well, except axis II down's syndrome, but that would make more sense to be axis III in my opinion.

The majority (and I would go 99% here) of all personal problems can be traced to Axis III, IV, or V.
The first two axes are symptoms of a serious problem that is occurring in the last three...

Do you agree with this or disagree?



Hmmm.
Axis I:
Clinical Disorders
Other conditions that may be a focus of clinical attention

Axis II
Personality disorders
Mental Retardation

Axis III
General Medical conditions

Axis IV
Psychosocial and environmental problems

Axis V
Global assessment of functioning

This provides us with a scientific systematic evaluation of any combined mental disorder, psychosocial and environmental problems with a level of functioning that otherwise might be overlooked or masked if we were to focus on one presenting problem.
Simplistically, it would be akin to playing chess, while only seeing half of the board.

From the brevity of what the OP is stating, he is hiding something, and I suspect an ulterior motive.
IMHO.
I do not have the honor of being called a fellow, for I did not spend an additional year under the tutelage of a fellow of my chosen specialty.
But thank you none the less.
edit on 1-1-2011 by Violater1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Trublbrwing
 


You will have to excuse me mixing the comments of you and the poster to which you responded.

Having a matter of fact attitude about death is not a problem if that is what you were inferring with your relationship with your wife.
I did not say that your behavior was causing distress, but what I said was "if" it were to be causing you distress in your relationship then that is how a therapist would handle it.

I do not have an opinion either way. I apologize for the misunderstanding.

The point that I was making is that emotions and feelings can most definitely be programmed and they are not as innate as some would like to believe.
You see... the way that you have projected about treating your wife in order to ready her for the assurance of your death is no different than BF Skinner's version of operant conditioning.

But that does not diminish the validity of emotions.
Skinner would say that emotions are abstractions at best and that we place a matrix of belief around a series of reinforced behaviors to symbolize these abstractions, but the emotions themselves are the result of a series of reinforcements.
No different than you wanting your wife to hate you in order to alleviate the emotional suffering of losing a loved one.
If they are not loved, then there is no loss.

The essence of my post was that what you are doing, attempting, or projecting is no different than social engineering or shaping.

And to sum this up...
In reference to the OP...
Sociopaths are not born or created, but born and created.

A certain physiological component is present for the presence of a lack of empathy.
But this can be conditioned or shaped into or out of a personality, especially when they are young or vulnerable, more so at will.





new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join