Should screening for genetic sociopathy be mandatory for politicians and police?

Whilst in prison we used to wind the Prison Officers up with our evaluation of those seeking power over others.
If you apply for the position you are psychologically unsuitable for the position.

Originally posted by soficrow
reply to post by apacheman

 

No need to be disrespectful. But btw...

There is no "evidence" for "genetic predetermination" - our bodies, brains and environment

Epic fail
you inheret everything from your parents
from your eye color,teeth shape,height,color,brain shape,IQ,talent,
maybe even psychopathy.......

Originally posted by apacheman
I think what some are missing is the fact that a genetic sociopath is discernable through mri and brainwave testing.

Genetic sociopathy is not a choice, nor subject to treatment. If you are a genetic sociopath, your amygdala isn't the same shape or structure that a non-sociopath's amygdala is, and doesn't function the same way.

Sociopaths are extremely dangerous: in some ways they are the archetypal vampire race that preys upon normal humanity; similar to, but not quite human.

From what I have read the PET scan can with a 90 percent or better accuracy at this time
identify the sociopath/psychopath brain.I have posted the same opinion as you. It is probably
the only way to improve society, to end the endless wars, and the endless slavery of one
sort or another. If sociopathy is inherited then they should not be allowed to breed either.
I have run into three of them and one was really dangerous and a lawyer. I could see
he truly enjoyed going to court and LYING. It was a fun game to him.

However it is more likely they will scan you for being a dissident non conformist then
you will scan them.

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by Ajax84

 

We would start by passing local ordinances at the city and county level.

I'm pretty sure that some politician somewhere will challenge the legality of such laws.

It would/will be very interesting to hear the court's take on the subject, and to find out what the media would do with it. Once a successful law had been crafted on the county level it could be advanced to the state level, where things would get very interesting.

I'd love to see which group/s would jump to the defense of the "rights" of sociopaths to be political leaders.

The courts are filled with psychopaths.
They would throw you out very fast,
and they would threaten you with contempt of court and jail.
I spent enough time in court to say that from experience.
No politician on any level is going to try and pass such a law.
They would though pass one to scan normal people for radicalism,etc.
Maybe after the revolution,LOL.

reply to post by RRokkyy

you inheret everything from your parents
from your eye color,teeth shape,height,color,brain shape,IQ,talent,
maybe even psychopathy.......

Humans have maybe 23,000 genes - nowhere near enough to account for the range of individual difference in the species.

There are estimated to be between 20,000 and 25,000 human protein-coding genes. The estimate of the number of human genes has been repeatedly revised down as genome sequence quality and gene finding methods have improved. Earlier predictions estimated that human cells had as many as 2,000,000 genes.[5]

Genes code for proteins, but it turns out that proteins don't really need genes - and other factors can override genetic coding. ...Very little about us is purely "genetic" - Reality is MUCH more complicated.

Proteomics is the large-scale study of proteins, particularly their structures and functions. Proteins are vital parts of living organisms, as they are the main components of the physiological metabolic pathways of cells. ...The proteome is the entire complement of proteins, including the modifications made to a particular set of proteins, produced by an organism or system... will vary with time and distinct requirements, or stresses, that a cell or organism undergoes.

reply to post by hawkiye


The website is working again. I did not watch the videos, but in reading it is promoting peaceful solutions to this corruption inflicting the world. There are many challenges and difficulties that do need to be faced to overcome these massive problems. Having the system aware of its sociopathic nature is one of many important components that are going to be needed in resolving and preventing this horrid state of affairs.

Anyone involved with this research and promotion of identifying and managing sociopathic behaviour will have a very clear idea of what they are up against. I support anyone accepting this important and challenging role and wish them the best of luck.

reply to post by apacheman


They totally should be screened for these traits .....but....what will happen is that the people with these traits will be rewarded with promotions etc as the demon class already established within the power structure adore these bad qualities and abhore good qualities

reply to post by apacheman

reply to post by kwakakev

One ethically controversial and highly risky treatment that has produced some sudden and significant changes in character is with the experience of Near Death Experiences. This does not work for everyone, but some people that have been clinically dead for a short period of time have had vast improvements in their understanding, values and approach to life. There is still a lot unknown about the after life, spirit and soul, yet there are some very interesting scientific studies around that indicates that something is going on. With a better understanding of this area it could also provide some valuable tools and capabilities in treating this problem.

Interesting! So, are you suggesting we flat-line the candidates for 10 minutes, revive them, and see if they had a psyche-changing epiphany? (Of course, if they aren't revivable......ah, well, sorry, dude).

LOVE IT! BWAhahahahahhaaaa.......bwaha

sigh.

seriously, though, folks....there are already "tests" for people seeking office -- extensive background checks, the "vetting" process -- when someone runs for office, their background is combed with one of those "flea combs" (the kind with the eeny-weeny teeth), and their opponent nearly without fail, will fling ALL of the candidate's mummifed poo at them prior to election.

the "checklists" used by clinicians and pychiatrists are too liable to "lying", as someone already stated...a true sociopath is going to know what the answers are SUPPOSED to be, and simply are NOT going to say,
"Oh, sure, I've done that!" unless you could somehow convince them that those are the things you WANT them to have done...
as in an interview.

Have you ever hurt someone else's feelings and not cared?
Have you ever lied to get something you wanted or to get away with something you did wrong?
Ever lit anything on fire?

Now, a skilled sociopath will look at you very strangely if you ask these questions (unless you're a mob boss and looking to replace Joey who just earned cement shoes) when the person wants to hold a public office.

We mustn't forget the MANIPULATION factor.
-------------------------------------------------
as for apacheman's suggestion - hell YEAH we should absolutely test for it. But, we already do, in theory, at least. And too many get into office. To me, this means the wrong people are asking the wrong questions of the wrong subjects.

How many serial killers or notorious "snapped" criminals have later been psychoanalyzed, and their moms and siblings and dads asked, "what were they like?"
For the worst offenders, there would be a paper trail from early school days of sociopathic tendencies. These folks would never get past "put my name on the ballot, please", because their backgrounds are scrutinized before they even get that far.

As for fMRI, sure, that's a start. Or the genetic markers? Yup, that, too. How about the polygraph and its ancestors? A combination of all of those would presumably reveal the tendencies.

......my only other comment is to respond to your remark that

be a farmer or a businessman

SERIOUSLY? A businessman?????

Um, we've already established that the CEOs of major corps are psychopaths - so, um, NO you MAY NOT be a businessman. You may dig ditches and drive a honey wagon emptying out septic tanks, or you may cut the grass or wash these dishes. That's all.

Heck, even letting them be a farmer would be dangerous -- esp with bio-warfare potential in mind...poisoned plants, meat, grains, dairy....

I don't have the answer, (and hi there to some of you who contributed to my thread in Social Issues regarding this matter)....
except that the "normals" should be carefully TAUGHT how to DETECT these monstrosities, to keep them from ever acquiring power in the first place.
But the system is already so infected with them that you would have to overturn nearly every corporate or bureaucratic or public "totem pole" and start from square one.

Cheers, all, I'd love to keep chatting, but I have to go the temp job I recently found...

reply to post by wildtimes

One ethically controversial and highly risky treatment that has produced some sudden and significant changes in character is with the experience of Near Death Experiences...

Interesting! So, are you suggesting we flat-line the candidates for 10 minutes, revive them, and see if they had a psyche-changing epiphany? (Of course, if they aren't revivable......ah, well, sorry, dude).

LOVE IT! BWAhahahahahhaaaa.......bwaha

sigh.

Well said, the theoretical implications do provide a lot of vengeful satisfaction but it ain't going to happen, in a civil society at least. My point was more about looking for answers to the sociopathic condition. There are plenty of people that experience these NDE's naturally and do provide an ethical source of research data. Maybe there is some chemical trigger or spiritual realisation that awakens people to the larger implications of their actions. Someone else mentioned '___' as another potential solution, this drug can be a very dangerous when used recklessly but may hold part of the key in the way it alters mental perceptions and awareness. A cure to sociopathy would be a god sent.

When looking into some of the mind control programs with the Monarch Project, the aim is to extend on military training that breaks a person mentally and physically and break the person spiritually as well. The are many traumatic rituals involved in this process. One of the more disturbing involves taking the person onto the boundary of death through very careful medical monitoring. Freezing the body while keeping enough blood flow to the brain is one method that has been used but there are others. There is still a lot of mystery with the life / death boundary but I do see a better way to handle the character issues is with a deeper understanding of what it is all about.

Your comments on how the system already has checks, but open to subversion through lies and manipulation is a good point and one area that needs reinforcement. The legal and review system does have a lot of issues, happy to take any old story instead of identifying and calling people on their lies. In smaller courts, Judges do have a good capability to get to the truth, but as the stakes get higher this capability does appear to reduce. Political pressure, skill of the liar, resource, lack of evidence, non disclosure agreements and technical challenges all inhibit the effectiveness of the system. The art of deception has been a part of nature for a very long time as it can be an effective survival technique, but now society is at risk of survival unless we can get a better handle on the problem.

reply to post by apacheman


Very interesting and one of the most useful threads in a while. Thank you for this. Now I think I need some kind of a "flash" card I can carry around in my wallet or a "quick-quiz" my acquaintances might take, so I can save myself a whole lot of aggravation later on. Seriously. I wish there was a a thumb monitor or a test strip of some sort for everyone.

In summary, the available data strongly support the suggestion that individuals who are predominantly reactively aggressive (at least spouse abusers and patients with intermittent explosive disorder) show atypically increased amygdala responses to emotional stimuli. This would be consistent with suggestions that the risk for reactive aggression is increased if the basic responsiveness of the threat system is increased; the individual is more likely to show reactive aggression rather than flight/freezing in response to a threatening/frustrating stimulus. Currently, however, the suggestion that reactively aggressive individuals show reduced frontal regulatory activity remains without strong support.

The data also strongly support the suggestion that amygdala and OFC functioning is disrupted in individuals with psychopathic tendencies. Other systems may also be affected, but this has not been clearly demonstrated. Critically, these studies provide us with biomarkers of the disorder. The dysfunctions observed are specific to psychopathic traits and are not seen in other patient populations. As such, they allow us indices of treatment response that are not confounded by a patient’s truthfulness or a clinician’s skill. It is to be hoped that this work will provide us the information to manage and ideally cure patients with this disorder.

www.springerlink.com...

This seems to be a quite good book on the subject and summarizes the state of neuroimaging and psycho/sociopathy fairly well. It won't allow me to copy, so I'll paraphrase the section on neuroimaging and say that several different methodologies all point in the same direction, and that what is needed is a broader survey base, i.e., more tests on more people looking for specific correlations between imaged responses and sociopathic behaviors.

Responsibility and Psychopathy: Interfacing Law, Psychiatry, and Philosophy By Luca Malatesti, John McMillan

books.google.com... mri&ots=HzdhWngVgW&sig=OT-7u9Xu0q-NGnBTKdKe6yjO7aQ#v=onepage&q=amygdala%20psychopathy%20fmri&f=false

There's a ton more articles to cite, I'll add them as I get time.

reply to post by lowundertheradar


That sociopaths/ psychopaths can be found in significant numbers among politicians, CEO'S, millitairy or whatever top is something I have always thought to be.

These people have no moral problem making difficult decisions which will be good for the company figures but not for the company personel. These people are skilled manipulators, dick-suckers and ass-kissers....

I have had the unpleasant experiance with a certified sociopath in my life and I can tell you that such people are a danger for your future happines if they see profit, in any way, being with you or your family.

If they are on the pay-roll of a company (political party) and access to promotion or growth they will feel like a fish in water. They love power, control and the taste of being respected. They can mimic being a normal person with emotion, moral and whatever it takes to be a loveable person.

Anyways...what I am trying to say is...they are hard to detect.....until to late.

I wish to add that not all sociopaths are evil people....they know that they must adapt and control their "power". Because that is what it is.....

Originally posted by soficrow



Humans have maybe 23,000 genes - nowhere near enough to account for the range of individual difference in the species.

Get real.
If you breed a duck to a duck you get a duck.

If you breed a moron to another another moron, meaning someone
with an IQ of 60 you will get more morons, you will not get offspring with
160 IQs.
Humans have understood genetics for 10,000 years . Only those
like yourself who have been brainwashed with the new CULTURAL MARXISM
where everyone is the same and equal think otherwise.

Another idea for people looking to cure sociopathy is with Multiple Personality Disorder. If more could be learnt about how a persons character can suddenly change it may provide some tools or techniques to aid in this issue. In learning about some of extreme mind control programs, Multiple Personality Disorder is one of the common side affects that can happen.

Part of the theory sounds like the brain fractures into independent parts where competition takes place for the dominate character or alter to take control at certain times. Another theory sounds like the individual's soul is purged from a body, which creates a fracture for other souls to slip in and control the body at certain times. This is a very complex topic to be able to define exactly how we work and why we do what we do. The neurological component is a very important one in how we process information and make decisions, but to get to the bottom of it all there are many areas that work together, social, biological, chemical and quite possibly quantum interactions that do all need to be accounted for.

reply to post by RRokkyy

Originally posted by RRokkyy

Originally posted by soficrow

Humans have maybe 23,000 genes - nowhere near enough to account for the range of individual difference in the species.

Get real.
...If you breed a moron to another another moron, meaning someone with an IQ of 60 you will get more morons, you will not get offspring with 160 IQs.

Most famous geniuses did NOT have brilliant parents - and some geniuses are born to "morons." Check it out.

Humans have understood genetics for 10,000 years .

Incorrect. Obviously, if they had, we'd be a race of super-humans. Equally obvious, we're not, and you do not understand genetics, molecular or otherwise.

Hint: molecular genetics is a scientific study, not a political opinion.

Only those like yourself who have been brainwashed with the new CULTURAL MARXISM where everyone is the same and equal think otherwise.

Cultural Marxism? ...FYI - Marxists are right beside Hitler and Hoover when it comes to Eugenics policies.

I suggest you try a bit of research, reading and actual education. For starters, remember Craig Venter? ...He's the guy who cracked the human genome. Here's what he had to say when the truth came out:

"In everyday language the talk is about a gene for this and a gene for that. We are now finding that that is rarely so. The number of genes that work in that way can almost be counted on your fingers, because we are just not hard-wired in that way."

"You cannot define the function of genes without defining the influence of the environment. The notion that one gene equals one disease, or that one gene produces one key protein, is flying out of the window."

Dr. J. Craig Venter, Time's Scientist of the year (2000). President of the Celera Corporation. Dr. Venter is recognized as one of the two most important scientists in the worldwide effort to map the human genome. Source: Times, Monday February 12, 2001 "Why you can't judge a man by his genes"

More basic stuff:

Scientists now know that the human genome probably contains only 30,000 genes, the vast majority of which are shared with other animals, and as a result are revising ideas about human development and behaviour.

The number of (human) genes — barely twice as many as the fruit fly and only 4,000 more than a garden weed called thale cress — is simply too small to support the idea that human beings are “hard-wired” by the DNA they inherit from their parents. Instead, researchers now believe that the complex ways in which genes operate in the body, and the environmental factors that influence every individual in unique fashion, may be more important than raw genetic material. The debate about the balance between nature and nurture is back on the agenda.

reply to post by lowundertheradar

My point as well. With no sure-fire way to assess FUTURE potential to developing these "traits"...I think we will never know for sure how one's life may turn out. It seems that some folks just are ok one day, and go "off" the next. Maybe someday we'll develope a conclusive testing protocal...and just not hire these people predisposed to them.But, that would be discrimination wouldnt it?

There is no easy answer. I think for a while we'll keep hearing about the neighbor down the block or the nice school teacher taking out a group of school children or nursing home for no apparent reason. I hope not.

Peace

reply to post by LazloFarnsworth


But we can look at fMRI results and quite clearly see the unmistabeable brainwave patterns that identify the sociopath.

Their brains are physically different, and the results of the difference are clear, consistent, and distinctive.

So not knowing WHICH gene or set of genes is responsible is not an issue. With further research over time we will find the particular gene or set of genes responsible. In the meantime we have the tools to weed most of them out, and it would be criminally negligent not to use them.

Arguing against their use is a good reason to have someone's brain checked to determine whether they are sociopaths themselves, for who else would argue for the "rights" of sociopaths to remain hidden? Given the degree of harm they can cause, it is not too intrusive to just check and make sure.

reply to post by apacheman

But we can look at fMRI results and quite clearly see the unmistabeable brainwave patterns that identify the sociopath.

Their brains are physically different, and the results of the difference are clear, consistent, and distinctive.

Not true. There is a great deal of controversy regarding exactly which brain areas' dysfunction creates sociopaths/psychopaths. Some say it's all in the amygdala, but other scientists don't agree - many think a frontal-deficit syndrome is to blame.

…in psychopathic patients, these sections of the amygdala remain dark, showing greatly reduced activity or none at all. This phenomenon, known as limbic underactivation, may indicate that some of these people lack the ability to generate the basic emotions that keep primitive killer instincts in check.

… Other researchers see similar deficits from fMRI scans of the frontal cortex, part of the reasoning center of the brain, which helps regulate impulsive and irrational actions. These researchers say that frontal-deficit syndrome creates a psychopathic inability to rein in overly emotional, impulsive, and violent reactions to the slightest provocation.

…some scientists say that this focus on the amygdala is too simplistic. "I'm not sure if the amygdala is the core of the problem," says Joshua Greene, assistant professor of psychology at Harvard University. Greene says that while the amygdala may be "one of the areas compromised," the affected part of the brain might be different in different patients.

So not knowing WHICH gene or set of genes is responsible is not an issue. With further research over time we will find the particular gene or set of genes responsible.

I'm glad you're beginning to see that "genetics" alone doesn't explain much.

…psychopathy stems from nurture as well as nature. Also, psychopathy is not a discrete syndrome, which you either have or don't have; it comes in degrees. Far from being compulsively violent criminals, many people with psychopathic traits can be quite successful, especially in fields that reward ruthlessness, such as business, law, and politics… Most psychopaths are not criminals, and most criminals are not psychopaths.

In the meantime we have the tools to weed most of them out, and it would be criminally negligent not to use them.

The "tools" are flawed, notably in terms of interpretation; it would be criminally negligent to rely on them.

Arguing against their use is a good reason to have someone's brain checked to determine whether they are sociopaths themselves, for who else would argue for the "rights" of sociopaths to remain hidden?

This is called an ad hominem attack.

Given the degree of harm they can cause, it is not too intrusive to just check and make sure.

It's more than intrusive - it's a violation of civil rights that opens the door for far greater and far-reaching violations: Should we test children, and label them young ? Should we test CEO's and bankers? How about voters? Why should we stop at testing for psychopaths? Shouldn't we test for mental competence too? …and where might it all end?

The movie Minority Report deals with your question very well: Should people be apprehended and punished for having the potential to commit a crime, before they actually do the deed? Or not?

…Unlike psychopathy, dementia's physical effects on the brain are absolutely verifiable. And dementia affects memory, thinking, language, judgment, and behavior. But autopsies show that many people with the physical features of dementia - and advanced physical degeneration of the brain - had few or no symptoms in life.

Why not? Why do some people whose brains are almost eaten away continue to function?

…It all goes back to brain plasticity or neuroplasticity, and the idea that different parts of the brain can pick up the slack, with new cells and connections being made all the time.

Psychopathy and dementia are similar in that neither condition is "either-or" - they both come in degrees - and dementia starts with "cognitive decline." As it happens, high blood pressure causes "cognitive decline" and dementia in young people as well as old - and according to the CDC, high blood pressure is a common condition.

High Blood Pressure Related Decline In Cognitive Function Affects Adults Young And Old
ScienceDaily

High blood pressure in otherwise healthy adults between the ages of 18 and 83 is associated with a measurable decline in cognitive function, according to a report published today by University of Maine researchers in the pre-publication online edition of the journal Hypertension. The article will appear in the October issue of the printed journal.

High blood pressure (HBP) is a common condition. In the United States, about 1 in 3 adults has HBP. …Over half of all Americans aged 60 and older have HBP.

On the theme of "testing" - and FYI - There was a campaign in 2004 to force voters to take "mental competency" tests, based on research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

A paper published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association raises some very troubling issues about mental illness and voting. …Historically, literacy tests were used to keep the poor and minorities from voting.

Fortunately, that particular campaign failed. But now, psychopathy is the disease de jour.

I do agree that psychopaths are downright scary - especially when they're in positions of power. But I'm more concerned that we have created a society that creates psychopaths, and rewards them for being ruthless. And I'm most concerned that our economic legal system literally demands psychopathic behavior from our professionals and politicians. In short, I think the problem is with our economic system and the legal system that supports it - not with the people who follow the laws.

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by Universer

 

From my reading, it's next to impossible to successfully treat a sociopath: they can't be "cured" in any normal sense of the word.

So the question, one of the questions, becomes:

If the tools exist to identify those people with an extraordinary capacity to cause extraordinary amounts of harm to both individuals and to society, is it negligence to spurn identifying them?

The only way to do it is to discover a method to identify Sociopaths/Psychopaths while they are still clumps of cells that is 90% accurate. Simply phase sociopaths/psychopaths out of existence.