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.

 

Sociopath vs. Psychopath

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   
Here is a good movie that discusses the idea of psychopathy and capitalism.

It is called I am Fishead.
Here is a description-

It is not too far fetched to say that for the first time in history we not only praise psychopaths in the highest positions of power, but in many cases, they became our role models.
On top of that, we don't seem to think it's a problem.

How much different are we from the average psychopath?

By embracing a superficial culture, each of us maybe unwillingly supports the fishead. Albert Einstein said, "The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it."

Through interviews with renowned psychologist Professor Philip Zimbardo, leading expert on psychopathy Professor Robert Hare, former President of Czech Republic and playwright Vaclav Havel, authors Gary Greenberg and Christopher Lane, professor Nicholas Christakis, among numerous other thinkers, we have delved into the world of psychopaths and heroes and revealed shocking implications for us and our society.


The movie also goes into detail about the abuse of anti-depressants and how their use manifests the clinical symptoms of anti-social PD, but when applied in a competitive economic environment where profit is the motive, these supposed psychopathic behaviors become desirable.

moniesisfun.... this movie shows exactly what you described rather cryptically,

Effectively cryptic, my friend.
I am a fan.





posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Good thing science isn't an exact science and there is always some sort of profit motive involved if ya look.


Perhaps the ones that come up with the criterias got some of the sociopath-psychopath nature as well.


BUSTED!!!!!!!!!!!




Social Norms?
Really? One look at it says its very abnormal.
Conform or Be Cast Out model will only create more sickness and profit-Really? Yes,,,,,really.
edit on 20-8-2012 by superluminal11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Sulie
 


Everybody's got a little socio and psycho in em!! They just highlight these traits when they want to, like for example, when a crimes committed,

And hey! Tis only my chin that's covered! lol



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 08:05 PM
link   
It has been my experience that psychopaths and sociopaths come in as many different configurations as regular people do.

Here is a link to an interesting blog I came across a while ago. Since it is a blog it's legitimacy cannot be verified, but as I said it was interesting nonetheless. Psychopathic Writings



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Atzil321
 


Actually no, sociopaths and psychopaths are different in brain damage composition. The damage structure difference is recognizable. A sociopath may kill out of necessity or for other reasons regarding their goals or agenda, while a psychopath may feel "driven" to do so. Many psychopaths enjoy what they have done and "get a charge out of it." Sociopaths are born as well as made. This has been a discovery in recent years by MRI brain imaging techniques.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rubicant13
reply to post by Atzil321
 


Actually no, sociopaths and psychopaths are different in brain damage composition. The damage structure difference is recognizable. A sociopath may kill out of necessity or for other reasons regarding their goals or agenda, while a psychopath may feel "driven" to do so. Many psychopaths enjoy what they have done and "get a charge out of it." Sociopaths are born as well as made. This has been a discovery in recent years by MRI brain imaging techniques.


I like the thread mate, and I gave the requisite star and flag, but I have to question this information.

Granted, I am neither a clinical nor a counseling psychologist.
I only have my lowly B.S. in Psychology, but I have never heard any reputable doctor apply the terms sociopath or psychopath in a clinical diagnosis.
In fact, from what I understand, they don't even exist in the structure of the current DSM.
They were terms once in vogue, so to speak, and used in previous publications of the DSM, but Psychology is moving toward a more hard science application and they were found to be too vague.
The only time that I ever see them used is on television or in movies or books.

That is it.

Robert Hare has an inventory that is a checklist of psychopathy, but in reality it is used alongside the MMPI 2 inventory in clinical settings when diagnosing a personality disorder.
More specifically antisocial personality disorder.

The only brain imaging studies that I am aware of concerning ASPD relate to very specific regions of the brain, the prefrontal cortex and the amygdala.

I would love to see a link to these brain imaging studies that you speak of, which I would gander also use fMRI's and not MRI's.
They are similar, but different.

What is used in brain imaging is called functional magnetic resonance imaging and it measures blood flow in the brain to specific brain structures.
I am not calling you out as wrong, but I honestly have never heard of what you are suggesting.
I can tell you that when I speak on these topics, I come from the perspective of a degreed professional and I would enjoy knowing what changes might be on the horizon, if, in fact, you are correct.

No offense, but most of what you have stated is typical pop-psychology/coffee table book information.
It's small talk meaningless type stuff that is not in any way empirically based or clinical.

Granted the DSM is currently undergoing a rewrite, but as far as I was taught in earning a degree from a research university, psychopath and sociopath are simply not clinical terms.
I could be wrong.
I do not discount this.

But before I believe what you have stated I would like to see the research.

Cheers.




edit on 20/8/2012 by kyviecaldges because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by kyviecaldges
 


I know what you are saying. To be honest, there are so many new terms now for the same psychological issues that the new DSM manuals carry compared to old DSM manuals. Brain scan imaging shows the areas of the brain that do not function versus the normal emotion brain, and also has shown in many instances that the brain of a sociopath is "hardwired" and structured differently.

www.rps.psu.edu...

psychcentral.com...
edit on 20-8-2012 by Rubicant13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rubicant13
reply to post by kyviecaldges
 


I know what you are saying. To be honest, there are so many new terms now for the same psychological issues that the new DSM manuals carry compared to old DSM manuals. Brain scan imaging shows the areas of the brain that do not function versus the normal emotion brain, and also has shown in many instances that the brain of a sociopath is "hardwired" and structured differently.

www.rps.psu.edu...

psychcentral.com...
edit on 20-8-2012 by Rubicant13 because: (no reason given)


That was a very interesting article and I gotta thank you for pointing it my way.

It discussed much of what I have already stated in the thread.
The area of focus in the study was the prefrontal cortex and the midbrain, specifically the amygdala and the thalamus, and they were using fMRI's.

What I found interesting was the constant use of the term sociopath when describing the research participants who were diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder.

The essence of the article really accurately sums up exactly why the two terms sociopath and psychopath are no longer used.
The researchers equate moral behavior with sociability.
In fact, they begin by stating that social interaction was the driving factor behind the evolution and grown of the frontal lobe.
This is in line with current empirical methodologies.

The reason for the exclusion of the terms sociopath and psychopath in diagnosis is due to their vague nature in describing behaviors.
Behaviors are the only truly objective markers that can be accurately measured and quantified beyond researcher bias.
And the more socially conscious an individual, the more likely they are to display moral behavior.

Antisocial personality disorder works much more effectively when describing criminal behavior in a psychopathic or sociopathic sense because it can be quantified.
The psychopath and the sociopath are both capable of sociability, and it is this factor that renders the terms rather useless.
Individuals who display amoral behaviors in a social realm, but yet are able to socialize and function are often diagnosed with the Millon subtype of an unprincipled narcissist of narcissistic personality disorder.

This will more than likely change in the next DSM as the terms become more and more precise.

I feel like I kind of rambled, but I wanted to offer my perspective on why the terms have been relegated to offhand descriptions and rarely used clinically.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by kyviecaldges
 


I will be honest with you. I am not a fan of many of the newer subcategory classifications of mental illness within the two classes. Why is the term sociopath any different than antisocial personality disorder? A sociopath is an individual who can not feel or process emotion. They have a difference in their brain that stops the emotional processing from happening. Giving the disorder a new name doesn't change the illness whatsoever. This is not directed at you, but to me it's just an argument in semantics. These professionals changing the terminology doesn't change the fact that true sociopathy is real, and they have no idea how to treat it effectively or cure it. Putting a new name on an old illness does not change anything in taking a step to change it. Richard Kuklinski for example, was in prison for 18 years and in that time the nature of his illness to my knowledge, never changed for the better. Kuklinski in my opinion was not a sociopath or someone with "antisocial personality disorder." He was a true to life psychopath in my opinion, who would recount his murders with zeal and humor. Ted Bundy in contrast, did not brag or gloat to people about the nature of his crimes. He often lied about them. A true sociopathic trait.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Rubicant13
 


I feel ya brother.

To be honest with you, I don't practice in the field for a reason.
I think that a lot of it is fantasy.

The very first thing that was drilled into my head by my favorite and probably most educated Phd'd professor was the maxim that correlation does not necessitate causation.
She must have told me a million and one times that very statement while using example after example, and then, when you get into the abnormal psych classes and clinical classes where we learn to diagnose...
Every single diagnosis is based upon a correlation.

In fact, that is all they got.

Now granted, I do very much believe that certain issues should be addressed.
Depression, ADHD, bi-polar, anxiety, OCD, dissociative identity, and psychopathic antisocial behavior.

I believe in all that.
I do. I have seen it in real form during internships.

But stuff like intermittent outburst disorder and gender identity disorder in 4 year olds...
That is too much.
Every single thing is medicated now and it is because, once again my opinion, the APA has x number of graduates every year and they need to make sure that work is available for these people.
Yes, I think that it's economical.

The APA and the pharmaceutical companies get together and basically decide what new ways they can medicate certain behaviors, and in the process the people that need help the most get denied and the people that don't need help get overmedicated.
It is a nightmare.

When someone goes into see a doctor, the HMO will NOT pay unless a diagnosis is made.
And every diagnosis comes with a pill.
Diagnoses change constantly because the doctor needs to get paid.

I was fascinated by antisocial behavior and I do like this topic.

I was really into the topic of deviance and what causes individuals to stray from socially constructed norms.
That does delve into sociopath/psychopathic behaviors because deviance is the foot in the door.

But deviant behavior is like all behavior, it is judged by an ever changing set of morally relative standards.

Psychology is interesting because it is a science that is only like 100 years into research, and in reality, it JUST began to conform to the rigors of the scientific method.
But because of this we will see a lot of growing pains and a lot of BS.

Including the loss of once applicable terms like sociopath and psychopath.
They are still very much applicable, and I did thrown in my 2 cents when I discussed that I personally saw sociopaths as disorganized and psychopaths as organized.
This applied to the brain imaging studies, but my interest is only passing.

I have this huge school debt to a study that I basically now think is a load of crap.

Tough situation indeed.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 06:26 AM
link   
reply to post by kyviecaldges
 


indeed. i summarize it in a few words that i believe most ppl ignore or do not realize. "psychology is mainly an experimental science".. meaning.. nothing is nailed. nothing is cast in stone.. one person's anxiety can be the result of a totally different set of environmental factors. and this is where it gets blurry. the minute a psychologist deems that "they know" or have come to some sort of conclusion.(that they totally understand what is going on in someone elses mind is the point where the psychologist themselves approaches being a sociopath.

it is also worthy to note that everyone is a sociopath. learning social relations from watching and mimmicking others. humans are a race of mimickers for that matter. all we do is imitate and translate what we see in the outer world into ourselves. making them part of our personality.

by definition.. anyone in a position of authority is a sociopath. and anyone who uses that authority to kill innocents without remorse is a psychopath. mainly because of the manipulative factor. this includes psychiatrists.

ive mentioned before that imbalance in the brain is a very important issue. again this is a brain development issue and not so much the mind. logic untamed is a mad emotionless killer. whenever it deems the circumstances necessary to cause death it does it without hesitation, without second thought. it is the nature of the robot. the logical brain may be malfunctioning or significantly weak yet still dominant while emotional intelligence is all but totally non-existant.

balance is always key and since this is a dual perception based world using one or another of our brains as dominant will cause us to have a flawed world view. the view may be correct and undeniable.. but one-sided and ignoring the second perspective that actually creates down to the simplest thing as 3d vision. it is like looking at the world through one eye and closing the other. using the other eye adds depth that would not be perceived otherwise, making the true picture clearer.

i have always pondered why is it that a psychopath can kill without mercy yet.. if one of his victims were to turn the tables and have a gun pointed at him ready to shoot, why do these serial killer types beg for their lives? why is it they only recognize that THEY dont want to die.. yet still they kill and even if the victim falters after sparing them a psychopath may re-turn the tables once more and continue with his plan of killing the victim. even after being spared by that victim. ive boiled it down to this.. a fundamentally flawed logical thinking capacity and an emotional intelligence so scarred it may be undetectable. it would seem they dont know or appreciate the golden rule: do unto others as you'd have them do unto you.
edit on 21-8-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-8-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 06:40 AM
link   
OP both are old terms and no longer recognized in the DSM. Also you have what used to be called a sociopath completely wrong.

Oh youre aware.
edit on 21-8-2012 by Domo1 because: (no reason given)


I cant get over you saying Bundy was a sociopath. He was textbook psychopath pretty much.
edit on 21-8-2012 by Domo1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 06:59 AM
link   
is not the aspd equally vauge. cannot it be used after the fact, only? why did the terms psycho socio become agents of obfuscation? how did we lose our mark? maybe the psychocovered their tracks good enough.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Rubicant13
 


Sociopaths are a product of their environment. That means that it is not that they don't have feelings but that they may have experienced and not experienced the trust and love (nurtured) needed when they are young. Although it is difficult and takes time to help a sociopath let down their guard, it is possible. The person must realize that their thinking is in error and they must live in an environment where they can witness love and affection by others as well as be willing to put effort in areas that they feel uncomfortable with. Say for example hugging. Some families are raised without any affection, this is one common thing with sociopaths. So when they grow up without it, it is actually uncomfortable when affection is thrust upon them, it is foreign to them. A change in environment coupled with the desire to express feelings with people who care about them may allow them to finally learn how to express feelings properly. So there is hope for a sociopath.

Psychopaths on the other hand are born with temperamental differences. They are not capable of internalizing norms but for survival purposes are usually amazing at imitating what people consider desirable personality traits. That is why they are so dangerous, they will appear normal, likable, charming, etc...but none of it is real.


edit on 21-8-2012 by ScatterBrain because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by 0mage
 





"psychology is mainly an experimental science".. meaning.. nothing is nailed. nothing is cast in stone.. one person's anxiety can be the result of a totally different set of environmental factors. and this is where it gets blurry. the minute a psychologist deems that "they know" or have come to some sort of conclusion.(that they totally understand what is going on in someone elses mind is the point where the psychologist themselves approaches being a sociopath.


S & F for this comment! As a psychologist goes through school, they should recognize that the purpose of this branch of medicine is questionable. We can label anyone if we so choose (or instructed to), when we need to... we just make new disorders up. It is a business, a method of research to understand, experiment and control people and their behavior, (including harm people). It takes a certain type of person to be comfortable and turn a blind eye to the manipulation/deceptive practices in this job.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Rubicant13
 


Sociopath, Psychopath, Rapist, Serial-Killer, Child-molester.

None of the above are BORN that way. Nobody is brought into this world as a pre-planned criminal.

Its the social influence.

Its all SOCIAL.

EVERYTHING.

Only limited numbers of information are passed through genes.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by ScatterBrain
 



It takes a certain type of person to be comfortable and turn a blind eye to the manipulation/deceptive practices in this job.


I totally understand this sentiment.

I am about 60 grand in debt to the school of my degree.
It is a great school with a great reputation for producing great research, but I have a moral qualm about the methodologies used in the practice of Psychology.

I could have very easily went on to a Counseling program, as in counseling psychologist (very different than a counselor. it's a Phd program).
I maybe could have done clinical research, I did well in my classes and my research was top notch, but I walked away from it all and I can't go back.

Too much BS.

Now I tend bar to pay the bills and I feel a bit foolish.
I feel like I got the wool pulled over my eyes, and I think that most students feel the same way.

A girl that I used to hook up with just graduated from the College of Charleston with a psych degree and the first thing that I asked her was how long it took her to realize how useless her degree is.
She knew.

Like me, it all hit her when she was in her last semester doing her research practicum.

I don't know what to think.
A part of me feels sorry for all these kids who will fall into the same trap as me, but then again I am one of those kids (not really. I am an adult) that fell into the trap.
It's a game and we are all getting played.

I can rap with the best of the best discussing the unique eccentricities of the soft science of psychology, but it is still more so an art form than a science.
I gotta stop talking about it.
Kind of making me depressed.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


I kind of felt sorry for Dahmer because it did seem that he felt something and almost as if he were a victim, too. His psychology will probably always be a mystery to us since he didn't live very long after going to prison.

Ted Bundy, on the other hand, was striking in that he never showed the tiniest little hint of any remorse, whatsoever. That's scarcely human.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   
If you believe it or not (just read the opening post) many successfull managers etc. have a profile comparable to the ones of psychopaths.In fact if you see their egoistic and anti-social behavior ("Let me fire 3000 people to get a bonus.") it's no surprise. And even as I don't have studies on hand, they exist. (Just go and google.)

Concerning the statement of "They are born this way." I am personally a friend of epigenatics and neuronal developement (plasticity of the brain). And statistics, should there be much more incidents concerning this perspective.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   
I love how humans have started to give names to extreme character traits. Character traits which are due to either social environments or genetic.
The reason for it is that we are trying to be clever and keep up the facade of a civilised society in which we are always only a short way away from barbarism.
We have to give names to every extreme behaviour and call it a disorder or an illness, when in fact it is only one of the possibilities of many that nature has created.

The way I see it is that there is no fixed amount os socio/ psychopathy. We are all on a point of a graph somewhere. Some more towards one end, others towards the other. Which point is 'normal' though and which point is best for survival?

Nature churns us all out one way or another. Some people get more neurotransmitters or hormones to make them more empathic, other get less. Extremes happen when you get either too much or too little but are they 'wrong'?.

In histories past, most people would manage to live with others quite well, whilst those outside the norm would soon be thrown out of the tribe or killed off, however in different circumstances others would thrive because they wouldn't fear war or fight. Become great warriors, take what they want and their genes would be spread.
Nobody who is too empathic could actually protect your tribe from attacks, whilst a non empathic person would do badly as a childminder.

Nature just churns us out in all kind of ways and sometimes it is good and other times it is not. Being extreme either way can have advantages in certain settings and disadvantages in others.

Who are we to say where something starts to be a 'disorder' and when it ends to be one?
I believe that anyone is useful in a given setting and a pain in the backside in others. Disorders they are not, just a variety of human, which has helped us to get where we are today.




top topics



 
15
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join