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.

 

(New title:) How are people manipulated by psychopaths?

page: 9
29
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Evanzsayz

 


You mean if she cheats? That happens about 99% of the time in America...no joke...women are scandalous



That's not true.
edit on 1-7-2011 by Partygirl because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   
I think the men and women who feel like the world is full of cheaters are the ones who attract sociopaths and let them into their lives. The sociopath puts up a convincing argument about why they're a better mate.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 01:09 AM
link   
Sociopaths can be revealed through a PET scan as their
brain functions differently than normal ones.

ALL PEOPLE SEEKING POSITIONS OF POWER SHOULD
BE PET SCANNED. Those that are sociopaths
should not be allowed to hold those positions.

THAT IS THE ONLY tiny possibility I SEE FOR
IMPROVING LIFE ON EARTH. Otherwise
things will continue the same as they have
been for the last ten thousand years with
slavery and warfare as the definition of
civilization.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 01:57 AM
link   
Crazy is as crazy does, and what's natural is. we'd need a population of toddler-brained fully grown adult clones to to ensure the safety from these monsters.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 02:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by RRokkyy
Sociopaths can be revealed through a PET scan as their
brain functions differently than normal ones.

ALL PEOPLE SEEKING POSITIONS OF POWER SHOULD
BE PET SCANNED. Those that are sociopaths
should not be allowed to hold those positions.

THAT IS THE ONLY tiny possibility I SEE FOR
IMPROVING LIFE ON EARTH. Otherwise
things will continue the same as they have
been for the last ten thousand years with
slavery and warfare as the definition of
civilization.


Actually, the natural order of things mandates that "psychopaths" are at the top of the food chain.
For the most part, they are the only ones qualified for the job.
Would you really want an empath/musician/poet making the executive decisions for your country?
That would be like putting Bill Cosby or Suzanne Sommers in office.
I'd rather have someone like CSI's Gil Grissom in charge, who, by the way, is a true sociopath.
edit on 1-7-2011 by SonofPeleus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 02:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by SonofPeleus

"psychopaths" are at the top of the food chain.e.

maybe these "disorders" are looked at in the wrong way?
maybe "psychopathy, and the like" are actually "humanity"?
it isn't like we can read people's minds yet so how far fetched would it be, is my blue your blue?



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by vivalarevolution
 


No.. there are psychopaths.
Defnitely.
Unfortunately the good ones all tend to make there way into positions of power where the can do the most damage.
I would even consider that the evil in the world that is contributed to NWO and such is actually just the far reaching agenda of a few handfuls of sociopaths. A lot of people think that way. You get someone without the ability to empathize in a position of power and you have a real problem that could reshape society as we know it.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:57 AM
link   
Morning, all!
Thanks again for the interesting thoughts.

DISCLAIMER: I keep up with recent research and schools of thought, but only as an observer of the field. I am not offering any medical or professional diagnosis here. If you are worried, SEEK A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL'S HELP.

Okay, that being out of the way, I think the thread has taken on a life of its own at this point, quite fascinating to read through. There have been a couple of comments and questions I want to respond to:

A) I do not "claim to be a PhD", therefore I don't "act like one." I have a Master's degree in Social Welfare. I am not a "psychologist" either. I am a social worker who chose the clinical track with a specialty in "Children and Families" -- in my area, that qualified me to become a psychoTHERAPIST. Please don't confuse the two. A psychologist is (to my understanding) trained in psychology in the medical model (disorder as disease). A social worker is trained in the interrelational/context model (disorder as response). My intention was to focus on that in practice: specifically, "troubled" or "behavior disordered" children and their families, as a helper, or alternatively as a hospital SW in ER or bereavement. My "career path," however, was not completely in my control, and the individuals with the power to "steer" me disregarded my directions. So be it. I landed where I landed. So I made the best of it. I didn't last long, for reasons previously disclosed. It happens a lot: burn out.

B) My OP was, indeed, to encourage dialogue. I wanted people's thoughts and opinions on the subject. I am an observer, and not here to "diagnose" or "declare" anything. I have offered what I was taught and what makes sense to me, but I BY NO MEANS claim to be the be-all, end-all expert on any of this stuff. In fact, I am the first to admit that I'm really not sure what to make of it all. If I thought I had all the answers, I would not have bothered to ask Team ATS what they thought!

C) to "OL": why does "OL" refer to himself in the third person? For effect? To appear strange?

D) these "disorders" are not exclusive to men or women, but they ARE (or were when I was practicing) exclusive to ADULTS. A child cannot be diagnosed with a personality disorder. They can be treated as having attachment disorder (inability to relate or have close relationships with others), or conduct disorder (the so-called precursor to antisocial PD), or adjustment disorder or PTSD or oppositional/defiant disorder and the like.

E) I posted the OP as a tangent topic to the current murder trial in Orlando that seems to have captivated the country. I have been watching it via camera inside the courtroom (no street-view, no jury-view, and no sidebar-volume). The family in question has shown behaviors that perplex me; as have the attorneys. The entire process, I think, is flawed. It is my interest in interpersonal relationships AND the context of the trial that prompted my OP. I have opinions about the family and system, but they are only that: opinions and speculation.

F) (a) Yes, I have (many moons ago) been taken advantage of by a couple of persons who convinced me of their non-existent sincerity, but this has NOT been a "pervasive pattern" in my life. It was a devastating experience, and yes, I felt that 6th sense "what am I doing here?" and "there is something not right with this picture". Unfortunately, I did not turn away before allowing infiltration into my life. Now I really know better; at the time I thought I was clever and going to "help".
(b) The BadBoy Syndrome is not the same (necessarily) as the Psycho-Magnet Malady (both labels are my own terminology and not clinical diagnoses).

G) Re the "evolutionary" concept that those who are are devoid of compassion are the "fittest"...well, I never thought of that before, and I will think on it some more, but it certainly explains the NWO stuff that led me to ATS in the first place.

H) I do believe in reincarnation, Karma, and soul advancement. I consider myself to be a "sophomore" soul, though I know people who seem to be "senior souls", and "kindergarten souls" (or "once-borns" as they are sometimes called). I believe we are here to learn from experience, and that until we are advanced enough to know how to live in a "perfect state" we will come back. And if we don't learn the first time round, back we go again. I also believe in the Celestine Prophecy theory that every person we come across has a reason for being there, and that even the shortest life is as it is for a reason (unknown to the person or the survivors).
..............................

Okay, so, I hope I have addressed the major points here. I will go back once more to check on what questions I have left unanswered. Meanwhile, if anyone cares to remind me of their question, or is just chomping at the bit to hear my "opinion", please let me know. Some questions seem more rhetorical than others, and again, I am NOT the keeper of the keys to the answers. I'm just a humble, curious, interested person (note Avatar)..."careful...carrrefullllll..."

Thanks, everyone, for your input/feedback on this interesting topic. Personally, I don't think we as a species are anywhere near understanding the brain/mind/soul thing. That's why it fascinates me so much.

Yall have worn out my poor widdwe bwain! But by all means -- carry on!!
Cheers to intelligent discourse!
--WT


EDIT TO ADD: Thank you to each and everyone who provided links. I look forward to perusing them.
edit on 1-7-2011 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 06:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by SonofPeleus
Actually, the natural order of things mandates that "psychopaths" are at the top of the food chain.
For the most part, they are the only ones qualified for the job.
Would you really want an empath/musician/poet making the executive decisions for your country?
That would be like putting Bill Cosby or Suzanne Sommers in office.
I'd rather have someone like CSI's Gil Grissom in charge, who, by the way, is a true sociopath.
edit on 1-7-2011 by SonofPeleus because: (no reason given)

You are completely right, our "civilisation" is led by madmen. But in reality, going beyond primitive logics such as food chain is a primary mission for humanity if we're to outlive dinosaurs. So far, dinosaurs are winning, by far. That said, humans are dumber than dinosaurs and they had pea-sized brains
.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 06:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Area_X
 


Originally posted by Area_X
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Hello,
As that you're a professional, I would like your opinion as well as adding my own comment on this topic.

First of all, I recently read this article from Scientific American on the subject:
www.scientificamerican.com...

After reading the article in S.A., your post and comment about much of society possibly being sociopathic, (A pandemic, as you put it.) I'm curious of your professional opinion as to whether one can be not only a high-functioning psychopath and yet be a "good" person and/or contributing member of society for the most part?


Awesome question. Although I'm still formulating thoughts about it, I'll try to answer as I see it now...I read the article (interesting! -- I had been retired from the field for a couple of years by the time it was published) this morning.

I think perhaps for purposes our discussion here, this is a semantics issue. A regular person can exhibit any number of traits, ranging from self-love to selfishness to self-destruction, lack of boundaries (or respect for boundaries of others) to complete isolationism. It is the degree to which these attitudes impair functioning across a broad spectrum of settings (work, family, social events, etc) that determines 'psychopathy.' Certainly a person can be contributing to society, but again, it depends on how you look at it. For example, a CEO of a major corp or bank that employs thousands of people could be considered "contributing" to society simply by virtue of the opportunities for employment that his or her successful company has provided. But does that make them a "good" person? IMO, not if they don't have any concern for what happens to those people.

Being a 'good' person is a philosophical and subjective judgment. It's one of the great questions of all time. My opinion, as a human, a woman, and a professional, is that "good" people do not wish ill on others. A "good" person, in my book, lives by the Golden Rule. Treat others as you would be treated


Example: A person functions in society, works, and puts on a "face" every day to do so, much like in the movie "American Psycho" minus the serial killer aspect and lack of feeling toward ALL people. This person highly values the life and feelings of those they're closest to; family, friends, etc. But when it comes to society, anyone they come into contact on a daily basis with means absolutely nothing to them. Literally. Were say, a natural disaster or some serious scenario to happen, they would not spend a second stopping to help another in need, but rather immediately speed to help and be with those exclusive people that they care about. The emotions, plight, and even death of others does not affect them unless they are in that small group of people they care about. This person does not go out of their way to use people, but rather simply doesn't care that they exist. (This person exibits a myriad of traits from different areas associated with psychopathy, but exclusively toward those they aren't close to.)

I see this persona more and more in society as I grow older and wonder...


I see it, too, and it's disturbing.
en.wikipedia.org...

I was going to cut and paste some of this wikipedia entry, but the whole entry is worth reading. I think what you are describing above is, yes, a misanthrope. Why would they completely not care about anyone outside their circle? Beats me. I will say, though, that our emotions tend to be most highly aroused around those people with whom we are closest. It is said that grief is painful in direct proportion to the depth of the relationship of the survivor to the deceased. That, I think is normal. If we all went around suffering acute grief reactions as if every death was our own child or parent or loved one, we could not function at all. So, in that way, it seems a defense or "reasonable" response that we do not sink into despair every time we hear of a tragic incident. I also think that the nature of the tragedy has an effect. I tend to be very angry about human-induced injury or death like acts of war, negligence, or downright murder, but less affected by natural disaster-type issues (though it's certainly saddening to think of all the people affected).

Earthquakes, floods, tsunamis, droughts, hurricanes, volcanoes, lightning strikes...those things are beyond our control (setting aside the possibility that those events are suspect as human-induced) and unfortunate, and the loss of life is saddening for me. But when people who have the power and resources to PROTECT others choose NOT TO, that makes me angry. On 9/11 my kids were in school when I heard the knews. I was worried for them. Did I speed to NY to help those in need? No. I did worry about my kids' reactions, however. I think that's normal.

If my neighborhood were being bombed, and I saw my neighbors on the street, would I offer them help? Of course! Would they offer ME help? I don't know, but I think at least some of them would...those with whom I have established a relationship, infrequent as it might be. If strangers came banging on my door asking for food and water and ammo and shelter? I would think twice. I think it's natural to want to protect our own loved ones. I would care that those people were needy and suffering, but I would be aware of whether or not I was able to protect my own family AND to help them.

Do I not care if they even exist? Of course I care if they exist. I think we are all one, all connected on a cosmic level that we can't comprehend on this plane of existence except in fleeting moments of enlightenment. But I know the circumference of my sphere of power. (Not very big).

I guess I would say that if those who could reasonably help others beyond their own chosen circle choose not to, I would consider that a lack of empathy. Self-serving, and greedy. Does that make them psychopaths? Not necessarily.


Is that person I too jaded? What if they've had a rough life, but no more rough than most?


This goes to resilience. We just don't know how some people turn out to be very healthy in relating to others even if they come from rough backgrounds, and how some who had optimum backgrounds turn out twisted.


Are they a misanthrope? If they truly hate most humans and while they don't wish them ill, detest everything they represent.
Or, do they have psychopathic tendencies as a high-functioning individual otherwise? If they truly have no empathy or feelings for others that are not close to them, other than pure disgust, what does that mean?


The page referenced on wikipedia above says that any of those things could be the cause....I think you have initiated a subject worthy of a new thread here! Wanna??


To me, it seems that you are correct that much of society exibits some form of sociopathy. Many peope don't even realize what emotional hypocrits they are, let alone what unempathetic users they have become.
I also believe that most people that exibit those tendencies aren't even aware on a concious level that they do, let alone what they're doing is morally reprehensible and utterly selfish.

Is this the point you're trying to make with your thread?
Can you provide any thoughts or insight on my question about people like I described?
(I feel I know some, lol.)


I am certain that I have known some! Are they aware? Well, when that last time I protested on moral grounds what management instructed me to do, I was told "you don't have to agree with it, you just have to do it," followed by "I've done lots of things I've disagreed with because Corporate told me to. That's just the way it is."

I responded that no, I did not have to, and in fact would not do so. This was in a job that had nothing to do with clinical therapy, I was a ground level supervisor for front-line staff. 'Corporate' was completely uninterested in how their 'policy changes' were disrupting, even endangering, people's lives. I left the corporate world very shortly thereafter (because in the first place I was not the "yes-ma'am" and "yes-sir" type of minion they needed in management, and in the second place I was disgusted with the whole idea of 'bottom-line spread-sheet profit margins' being the driving force behind those policy changes. Sickening.)

So...there are people who seem able to ignore their moral compass for whatever reasons (a paycheck, an office with a window -- or for that matter, just an office -- a portrait hanging in the cafeteria as a department head....who knows? A family to support, inertia, no backbone? Or simply they don't care if a staffer has their needs met or not?). I am not one of them. I think MANY in positions of power are that type. MONEY is the most important thing to them, I guess, or accolades or acknowledgment or fame or power or whatever. I'm not sure they are haters, like serial killers for example, or genocidal maniacs, but they are certainly disengaged from their fellow humans, and that is not 'good' in my book.

I think in the big picture many of them are aware that their behavior is morally reprehensible, but just choose not to think about it or find ways to justify it ("I have a child and a fat mortgage to look after -- the rest of the world isn't my prob"). To me, that is selfishness.


Thanks for posting this. I am nowhere near a professional, but have seen this as an increasing theme in our society and see it as a serious issue...and it bothers me.


Yup. It bothers me, too. I have said in many a meeting with so-called 'superiors' that the only rule we need, the only policy that matters, is the Golden Rule. Everything else should be subordinate to that. I stand by that today.

Hypocrites, yes, especially those who claim 'open-door policies' just so staff imagines they are being heard and will be validated. IMO, those 'open-door policies' are a sham -- just to weed out the gainsayers. If you go in and say "I have an issue with this", that's the day they start your "file" and start compiling documentation to get rid of you.

In My very lenghty and verbose Opinion.
sigh
--WT





edit on 1-7-2011 by wildtimes because: check format, spelling, clarity, etc. Sorry for the colossal size of the post.

edit on 1-7-2011 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by TheBirdisDone
 


Wow! No, my graduate studies did not include this, to my recollection. Thanks, will read with much interest!



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by l_e_cox
reply to post by wildtimes
 

We depend on our mental health professionals to understand these types of things. Yet you are telling us that they don't. And this seems strange, since the research has been done and various effective defensive methodologies have been devised. There have even been some therapeutic methodologies attempted.

My introduction to psychopathy was in the form of a very public killing, the JFK assassination. If it hadn't been for that event, I probably would have become a quiet scientist in some backwater university studying crickets or something.

It was my wake-up call that all was not right in the world. And that if anyone understood why, they weren't telling. The mental health system, I later learned, was itself the victim of a psychopathic takeover and had been contributing very little useful work to the subject of mental health since around the time of Freud.

My own personal interest in this subject lead me 1) to the whole "ancient astronauts" concept and 2) to the work of L. Ron Hubbard. If you want to break some ground on this subject, you have to go to these places. If you have always had the idea that these subjects are "useless" or full of "con artists" you might be interested to learn where those invalidating ideas originated.

Rather than writing a short primer on how psychopathy developed and how it works, which would be full of data that most "sensible" people would certainly consider to be at least bizarre and quite possibly dangerously misleading, I will end here and recommend these subjects to those interested in a broader understanding of this phenomenon. It is without any doubt a real phenomenon. But its genesis and solution are unbelievable. And thus it persists.


I am also into the whole "ancient astronauts" concept.
A brief look at L Ron Hubbard on the internet indicates that he is the "church of scientology" founder. I will look further into it, but at first glance I have to dispute his credibility. Nevertheless, I do not in any way condone or deny his theories. I am a student, not a messiah.

Thanks very much for the refernce!
Cheers!





edit on 1-7-2011 by wildtimes because: misspelled 'reference'!



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by vivalarevolution

Originally posted by SonofPeleus

"psychopaths" are at the top of the food chain.e.

maybe these "disorders" are looked at in the wrong way?
maybe "psychopathy, and the like" are actually "humanity"?
it isn't like we can read people's minds yet so how far fetched would it be, is my blue your blue?


Excellent point, friend! I often think about how strange it is that I'm the only person behind my eyes....no one else can ever go there....and I can never go behind someone else's, really...



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Awesome thread, and very thoughtful answers.

My background, my mother is a very intelligent, (IQ over 150) sociopath. So, I grew up watching her do what she did, and because I was privy to her behind the scenes life, and naturally analytical, I really learned a lot about lying and manipulating watching her do her thing. So thats my expertise.

To the people who complained about the idea that sociopaths victimize others, its just a fact that they do. Some people DO have their own issues which play into their becoming victims, and others dont. Some people really are just innocent victims of sociopaths. And no, I dont consider myself a victim. I wouldnt trade my experience with my mother, because it has taught me a LOT of things that have been very useful to me, and which have prevented me, by and large, from being victimized as an adult. I can see a sociopath pretty clearly, pretty quickly. Thanks Mom.

In terms of the world being full of sociopaths, I dont think so. I think true sociopaths are a relatively small percentage of the worlds people. But, the intelligent ones, because what they do is so profitable if done well, gain power, and when sociopaths make the rules, you end up with a trickle down effect in terms of societal behavior.

Most people might have the potential to behave that way, in other words, but its not their nature. In many cases I think its just a matter of learned behavior for the majority. Plato talked about how society must hold out as admirable only those noble human qualities, honor, bravery, justice, etc., and if it did, the people would swing that way. But even in his time, that was waning, and "heroes" were losing their shine to what we would call more sociopathic behaviors, self interest, ruthlessness, etc. I think he was just right. As societies became larger, and sociopathy more successful within groups. (sociopathy is not a good strategy in small bands of people because you get caught out too easily, but it thrives in bigger systems where sociopaths can move about and escape their bad reputation when it gets too hot somewhere)

All most people know is that the people on the top are on top, and are "successful" and "admired" and "powerful" and its human to want that too. And so they mimic them. And thats what I think has happened, for most people. Sociopathy has just taken root and become to some degree a social norm. Less so in small communities, and more so in larger ones, but thanks to TV and other media, its spreading all over the world rapidly.

It just seems "smart" to be a winner. And the average person wants to be a smart winner, and there really is not competing ideology in the world today against the sociopathic one. The labels of the traits we used to find desirable have been co-opted to describe sociopathic ones, and because the label is the same, not many peel it back and look to see if the actions are actually the same as the ones that used to wear that label.

So, I dont think its some horrible truth that humans are becoming more sociopathic by nature. I just think that because we have glorified it, its been adopted. I think if and when we began to really praise and reward and support the older values, of working for the greater good of the group, and drawing your benefit from that and the real friendship you get from acting that way, the majority of people would snap happily back into that way of being.

I think the reason so many people ARE unhappy in general is because they arent sociopaths, but we live in a sociopathic society, and our human needs are not being met by it.

Sociopathy unfortunately has its benefits, a sociopathic leader might be more brutal to your enemies and thus bring more resources to the group, and thats likely how they gain power. It is beneficial in some instances to have a sociopathic leader when competing with others. But its never in your best interests to have a sociopathic leader during peace, and thats probably why we are constantly at war. Humans know that on some level.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes

Originally posted by vivalarevolution

Originally posted by SonofPeleus

"psychopaths" are at the top of the food chain.e.

maybe these "disorders" are looked at in the wrong way?
maybe "psychopathy, and the like" are actually "humanity"?
it isn't like we can read people's minds yet so how far fetched would it be, is my blue your blue?


Excellent point, friend! I often think about how strange it is that I'm the only person behind my eyes....no one else can ever go there....and I can never go behind someone else's, really...



Wrong.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by shushu
 


I agree. While I cant "read someones mind" in any literal way, its really not as hard as people want to think it is to figure out their motives and thus, get a rough idea of their internal dialog. And if you have the opportunity to watch their face and body, they give away much more than they think.

Some people dont really pay attention to other people because they are TOO caught up in their internal dialog and because they dont see what other people are doing/thinking/motivated by, they assume no one can see them either.

But you can. Some of us are watchers, and while we do listen to what you say, we are actually taking our biggest clues from your actions, body language, facial cues, etc. Mouths lie more easily than bodies/faces do. And there are ways to poke people to get them to reveal their real agenda if you are in doubt.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by shushu
 


I agree. While I cant "read someones mind" in any literal way, its really not as hard as people want to think it is to figure out their motives and thus, get a rough idea of their internal dialog. And if you have the opportunity to watch their face and body, they give away much more than they think.

Some people dont really pay attention to other people because they are TOO caught up in their internal dialog and because they dont see what other people are doing/thinking/motivated by, they assume no one can see them either.

But you can. Some of us are watchers, and while we do listen to what you say, we are actually taking our biggest clues from your actions, body language, facial cues, etc. Mouths lie more easily than bodies/faces do. And there are ways to poke people to get them to reveal their real agenda if you are in doubt.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Explanation: Yes! For effect! It caught your attention fair and square!


Personal Disclosure: But this isn't about me ... [rereads thread title] ....Oh hang on!!! Never mind... my bad ... it clearly IS talking about OL and his disorder!


Now about victim mentalities? Sure we COULD blame someone else!!! After all who was the one who made who? WHY wouldn't this all be God's fault???

Cogito ergo sum [wiki]

Ahhh OK ... because I'm both the center and the one who thought originally! That means I made me and thats who I ultimately have to answer to... GOD! Your looking at him ... its called YOU! Because who was the one REALLY showing the contempt for themselves by associating 'foolishly' with the scum in the 1st place... You play in the mud with the pigs expect to get dirty ok!


OL is a monster and you unfortunately have mirror neurons that act to mimic what I do and viceversa!

Now who is rubbing of more on the other!

Because I could go on to describe in explicit detail how to violently and cheaply ... over throw the current Australian Governement of the day with off the shelf at your local super market and diy store stuff OR I could show how to fix the probs we have with some simple solutions.... again with off the shelf stuff!

BOTH EVENTS would cause the absolute destruction of tptb [at least in australia ] and so regradless of whether I am good natured or not ... the outcome is death and pain for me and others.


And yet you wonder if OL is REALLY insane or not! Let me ask you ok ... what do you think, AM I CRAZY???



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 

Thanks for the response, Wildtimes. There's a great book, The Sociopath Next Door written by Martha Stout, Ph.D., which has helped me immensely in understanding what happened and which keeps me thinking straight when I start with the self-doubt. I literally read the entire book cover to cover in about three hours as it fascinated me so. It helped give me back my self-respect and provided the fortitde to know that sociopaths are the exception to the rule (she and a number of her cited colleagues estimate that 4% of the population can be clinically diagnosed as a true sociopath) which leaves 96% of the population who, despite their warts and all, are good conscience-based people capable of honest emotional attachment. It's taking a while to trust again but I'm getting there...

Thanks again for the great post!

Timidgal



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by SonofPeleus

Originally posted by RRokkyy
Sociopaths can be revealed through a PET scan as their
brain functions differently than normal ones.

ALL PEOPLE SEEKING POSITIONS OF POWER SHOULD
BE PET SCANNED. Those that are sociopaths
should not be allowed to hold those positions.

THAT IS THE ONLY tiny possibility I SEE FOR
IMPROVING LIFE ON EARTH. Otherwise
things will continue the same as they have
been for the last ten thousand years with
slavery and warfare as the definition of
civilization.


Actually, the natural order of things mandates that "psychopaths" are at the top of the food chain.
For the most part, they are the only ones qualified for the job.
Would you really want an empath/musician/poet making the executive decisions for your country?
That would be like putting Bill Cosby or Suzanne Sommers in office.
I'd rather have someone like CSI's Gil Grissom in charge, who, by the way, is a true sociopath.
edit on 1-7-2011 by SonofPeleus because: (no reason given)


If the job is enslaving people, waging war on your neighboring tribe, or fighting another psychopath
like Hitler,Stalin, then you might be correct.
Suzanne Sommers gave us Three is Company. Johnson/Nixon gave us
the Vietnam Holocaust in which 5 million southeast Asians died at a cost
of trillions of dollars to our society.

While they may make up only 6 percent of the population another 5 or 10 percent around
them will imitate them or work for them thus enabling them to control everyone.
They are the NWO. Welcome to your Nightmare. They are everywhere. Even your HOA,
homeowners association where they receive no salary other than POWER FOOD.

Any time you deal with people in power you are dealing with sociopaths and their spawn.
Dont ever forget this.
You are entering Kafkas world of the human shark that will devour you.
They are human real life cannibals that seek to consume your psyche.
When sociopaths network you have a conspiracy as judge,jury and executioner are all
rolled into one.
Even after reading this you will still be too naive to comprehend it.

PS:There was a poster here who claimed to be a sociopath and he was perhaps the most
interesting person to post here in two years. Unfortunately he was banned on his second thread
which was probably the greatest loss to ATS since. I believe TPTB here were quite frightened by
his extremely revealing and provocative first thread which could literally chill one to the bone by
the inhumanity of his personality. (I dont recall his nym)

edit on 1-7-2011 by RRokkyy because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-7-2011 by RRokkyy because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
29
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join