Re: The tie between psychopathic motivation... removing free will... the devil?

[Broken piano]

Hello to you and this forum. This is my first post on the Internet and a complete coincidence (another topic for another day) to come here. I don't know how active this old post may be but I will add something of my own experience and a few thoughts for my own reasons. I have taken to the occasional research on anti-social personality disorders and psychopathy, which includes forums and chats for diverse perspectives.

Regarding myself: I have psychopathic tendencies. To be more specific. I have APD (Also ASPD, anti-social personality disorder) which tends into the psychopathic side of the state.

(A side note: I would like to clarify that APD is a scale, with dimensions and planes within it. APD generalizes autism, asbergers, sociopathy, psychopathy, and other conditions. The qualities and characteristics vary by each person and their "condition" but do remain a grayscale and generally untreatable, at least pharmacologically by medical and psychiatric professionals. Arguably this is because personality is a characteristic of psychology and not necessarily a disease. (More to follow on that line.)

I was personally and professionally diagnosed through the last 2.5-5 years, as I went through my first experience in the criminal justice system and the available rehabilitation. I have bounced back and forth most of my life being "good and bad" depending on one's point of view. I work and attend university in applied and theoretical sciences, for obvious reasons.

The argument here which I would like to present and is the most pertinent of my commentary, is that free will, be it an ability or capability, characteristic or capacity, is inherent to all people. Belief is a choice, as is non-belief, and the execution of free-will is much the same. Psychopaths have the greatest capacity of free will in the realm of anti-social personality disorders as they lack the confines of social dysfunction, comprehension, OCD, mannerisms, etc. The flaw, or disability, which I would argue, to align with your observations, and from my true experiences with psychopathy is this: the lack of confines of average morals and empathy which dictate expected social responses and actions. The inhibition and unlimited options are what lead to a perception of a "devil's path"; one which the "lost sheep of the flock may travel". This leads to my later hypothesis regarding a hero/villain perspective. It is a responsibility most don't realize or understand, including people with this condition, of having the ability to guide and to guard, or to sabotage and destroy, without hesitation or conditioning.

Introspection is uncommon to people with APD, especially sociopaths and psychopaths. I find myself fascinated with the aversion my friends and family initially had to the concept, and the years I was counseled without being told what I was being counseled for. Cognitive therapy is the primary treatment for these conditions. The APD brain is wired differently essentially, not incorrectly; chemicals and neurons firing and channeling just a little differently in every person. Obviously from a highly sensitive and empathetic person to cold killing machine it appears night and day to laymen and researchers alike. However, all people lie on a spectrum without borders - and all are as such: people.

Someone who feels bad or scared to do wrong to another or commit an unethical act has a safety net; it is easy to "choose to behave" when it's difficult to strike down our principles and be something different. When one has no boundaries and can do anything, with complete and true free-will, it is very difficult to will oneself to stop and follow rules that are essentially invisible and non-existent (to the psychopath). It takes far more effort when one doesn't have fear. It falls entirely on individual strength and motivation, especially since these types of people are usually alone psychologically as 97% of the world shares the common moral compass, and fewer still of the APD category (by the DSM-I'V) are even psychopathic. I have taken interest in the challenge of being a "better person". Fortunately my inhibition and high risk behaviour, along with the right circumstances aligned my actions with positive potential: helping car accident victims, fire-assistance, defending attack victims, offering first aid and emergent medical assistance. This is more difficult than victimizing the weak and unintelligent and cheating a flawed system, and therefore piques my interest. It is harder to do the "right thing".

To close my wordy endeavor I offer this. A single case of a psychopath such as myself who chooses to make the world better does make me emotional or empathetic. I simply do it because it interests me, not because I care. This disproves the universal quantification that psychopaths are slaves to a particular free will or path; they are simply people who are different. There is a multitude of moral people who commit immoral acts, and this is a far greater betrayal of ones character in the eyes of a psychopath.

 

[Laura]

Fortunately my inhibition and high risk behaviour, along with the right circumstances aligned my actions with positive potential: helping car accident victims, fire-assistance, defending attack victims, offering first aid and emergent medical assistance. This is more difficult than victimizing the weak and unintelligent and cheating a flawed system, and therefore piques my interest. It is harder to do the "right thing".

To close my wordy endeavor I offer this. A single case of a psychopath such as myself who chooses to make the world better does make me emotional or empathetic. I simply do it because it interests me, not because I care. This disproves the universal quantification that psychopaths are slaves to a particular free will or path; they are simply people who are different. There is a multitude of moral people who commit immoral acts, and this is a far greater betrayal of ones character in the eyes of a psychopath.

Interesting. Thanks for your perspective. As you say, there is a spectrum, and your particular "arrangement" of traits offers you a challenge that effectively serves to integrate you into society in certain ways. And, I guess it depends on how you define "people" as to whether psychopaths are just "people who are different." If you define them as physically similar in morphology, yeah, but if you define them as having certain evolutionarily developed social characteristics that are common to the species, then, no.

Having said that, one wonders what might be the long-term effects of engaging in such a "self-challenge"?

 

[Alana]

Hello to you and this forum. This is my first post on the Internet and a complete coincidence (another topic for another day) to come here. I don't know how active this old post may be but I will add something of my own experience and a few thoughts for my own reasons. I have taken to the occasional research on anti-social personality disorders and psychopathy, which includes forums and chats for diverse perspectives.

I am curious, what prompted you to make your first post on our forum then?

 

[Broken piano]

Hello Alana,

I troll, I suppose one could say, the Internet for papers, research, dissertations, and any kind of literature regarding psychopathic and APD research from time to time. Unfortunately it's a slow process since most APD types don't care about being understood (neither do I) and therefore contribute little to the research. In fact, participation is usually court mandated which leads to rather unreliable results. I'm here to gather thoughts for me to think about and weigh in. However, I understand my visit may be a positive experience for some of your members too which may encourage a good discussion. I'm here to play nice and learn, not to start trouble. That aside I find opinions and forums in these searches and I occasionally read them. This morning I found this and my impulse was to join in for a time as I found some entries interesting and intelligent enough to consider. I don't care to be overly judgmental but the Internet is a rather inbred pool of thought. This is a compliment to your organization.

My fatal flaw it seems is the poor ability to learn about myself and learn from my mistakes. I understand I haven't always been satisfied with the outcomes of my endeavors but the feeling doesn't stick. So I look for behavioural methods and motivations to fulfill my need for change while keeping me on track. I find non-APD types have a hard time understanding this concept and it can be hard to encapsulate. I already like Laura's astute point of the inherent problem with my design and will reply now.

 

[Broken piano]

Hi Laura,

I appreciate your second question, which draws on the most obvious problem with my concept. Given the track record of psychopaths, it almost guaranteed to fail. I have attempted to remove the social flaw by telling my girlfriend and closest people about my APD personality. I admit I didn't want to as the instinct is to conceal and manipulate this information. However, I have observed that I have not always achieved the things I wanted by deception, and I was also somewhat fascinated to learn more accurately my psychological persuasion. I'm expect most people in this forum will have sought out the obvious and generic characteristics of sociopaths and psychopaths. They sound rather harsh I understand, but are invaluable tools for winning. (No, that's not a good thing. It's just the way it is.) I, like others of my disposition, desire power, social status, talents and abilities, wealth, and other means of living, enjoyment, and putting oneself above the rest. I am adapting a more co-operative strategy. I look for the qualities in others that are positive and fulfill my interests together. I occupy my busy mind with education and hobbies which align me with the position I would eventually prefer to be in as well as give me short term rewards. Motivation is critical in this regard as long-term goals are difficult for those who have trouble planning ahead or learning from their mistakes. The right challenges and rewards can provide an achievable and sustainable path for a psychopath. This also saves the trouble of scaling superficially, falling out, finding a new social circle to leech on, and rebuild. Sustainability is key and I believe finding the right tools and exposing ones nature are crucial. Make it nearly impossible to deceive and hide, and a co-operative effort is left. Of course those around you must understand the nature of the motivation and see the positive results is can produce instead of fearing understanding it. Constant adaptation and tweaking seem to have worked for me for a little over three years now. Remarkable is you consider the alternative and the fact that only the path matters to me, not the ending. Time will tell...

Now for the first point:

The determination of being human, more specifically, a "person", I have found shifts consistently from topic to topic. Traditionally, consciousness and choice (free-will) seem to be the foundation for such status. Of course there are a plethora of interpretations of Hume and other philosophers which extend to social, psychological, and spiritual realms, but do not encapsulate the whole of the human race. Morphology typically includes the structure and form of biology, where are humans are virtually identical. From perspectives of genetics, physiology, neurology, and biochemistry we are all almost perfectly identical too. Almost being the key word. No person is absolutely alike; not in mind, body, or behaviour. Similar, but not the same. To differentiate the human identity by subtle neurochemical composition and behaviour opens the door to other mental and physical differences. Those of higher and lower intelligence have different levels of brain function and activity but we don't base being a person on test scores. Race, genetic mutation (both beneficial and not), persons of disability, sexual orientation, environmental adaptations all differentiate people across the globe.

If a psychopath is understood, and given the right motivation to do well and play by the rules, they may succeed. If they stigma remains, and they remain segregated to do as they want, they will. Random people, seemingly normal, break years of normal behaviour and shake our society, often through violence, because they was no guide or support for the individual. A label is a powerful thing. The most unfortunate point is that a psychopath doesn't care what happens, to others or themselves if gone unchecked. From what I have seen, the ones who lose are the ones who care. Ironically the motivation for "people" to incorporate psychopaths openly, would be for their own safety and the benefit of others in their society.

From Kevin Dutton's research I understand the Vikings used psychopaths as "berserkers", front line warriors to battle and fight. That being said, not all warriors are psychopaths, and vice versa. Not all genocides were at the hands of an APD. Business's are often headed by ruthless CEO's. Hospitals employ psychopaths steady, calculating surgeons. Not only do APD types control much of the wealth and power in this world, and there is a great disparity in this, but the dichotomy is celebrated as the majority of people reside in poverty. Conversely, upwards of fifty percent of incarcerated males may possess and APD disposition, and the rehabilitation and psychology applied to our criminal justice system is clearly inept at both stemming this problem and improving the direction of these peoples lives. The sad recidivism rates speak loudly to this point. Psychopaths, as people, have forged our evolution in their own way: through exploration and invention, and battle and defense both against animal predators and warring nations. All people have a purpose, albeit with differing ways.

Societies and the varying groups within have claimed slaves and indigenous people to be inhuman in less reformed times, though not so far in the past, and that has fallen. Animals often demonstrate emotions and empathy to other organisms, dogs and dolphins being prime examples. Yet some would say that that does not give them souls, and obviously does not make them people. From what I observe, people of an APD nature, have the mind to try understand others emotional states, regardless of the level on which they feel them. They need to understand the difference and be motivated to develop constructively. None of us can perfectly feel what another does, or know exactly what they are thinking. It seems somewhat contradictory from my experience that people of an empathetic and human nature would seek to exclude members of our race who are different. I believe that if I, with my disposition, have the will to be a part of the team, then others can too. Thinking, reasoning, growing, evolving together - that seems to make humans people.

 

[Laura]

Brokenpiano, I've read your post and you make a number of interesting remarks that I will respond to within the next couple of days because I would like to think about it.

 

[Broken piano]

Thank you, please take your time. I understand there is some reading which supports and guides this discussion which I have not read. I hope your members will forgive me for the time being. I would also like to point out that many people with extreme APD do enjoy being predators and monsters in society and I, obviously, in no way can encapsulate the collective mind. I simply am stepping forth because I think the potential can be harnessed to a greater purpose beyond the cannibalistic state it currently occupies; we just need both sides need to close the gaps.

 

[ark]

The argument here which I would like to present and is the most pertinent of my commentary, is that free will, be it an ability or capability, characteristic or capacity, is inherent to all people.

Hi Broken Piano. The above is of interest for me. You say you are working with science. I am a scientist. Free will problem attracts my attention for a long time.

Now, scientists usually know that when they state something, they better provide a "proof". Otherwise they may propagate false knowledge. That is VERY BAD science.

What is your proof of your statement above? Remember - you say "all people". This is an extraordinary claim. And extraordinary claims, as Carl Sagan (probably you know him well?) once said (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan ), require extraordinary evidence.

What is your scientific extraordinary evidence for your extraordinary scientific claim?

 

[Broken piano]

Hello,

I specialized in theoretical physics and mathematics in my undergraduate degree and am now engaged in applied field work along side this as I enter my new career. I am responding to this forum specifically from a personal and psychological perspective as I have seen no evidence provided for the opinions at hand. Free-will is nearly an impossible proof by means of pure science as it appears more of a philosophical argument. That being said, what form of science do you study? I believe it appears argumentative to charge me to prove the free-will of the human race. A simpler task would be to disprove the universal quantification by providing evidence of a human being who does not have free-will or choice. With the exception of the extremely intellectually handicapped, this seems to be a primary characteristic in self-determination via consciousness. Philosophy is not my area so excuse my lay approach.

 

[ark]

Broken piano,

You have stated, almost as an axiom that is supposed to support all the rest of your argument:

"The argument here which I would like to present and is the most pertinent of my commentary, is that free will, be it an ability or capability, characteristic or capacity, is inherent to all people."

Is it your claim? Or, if you are unable to provide evidence, perhaps you will withdraw it, apologize for making arbitrary claims, and start from scratch without making such claims?

Right now I am really suspicious about you. How a scientist would make such claims? You do not write like a scientist. You write like an artist. I do not trust you.

But I can be mistaken. So, if you apologize for making a mistake, withdraw it, say "I was wrong", I will apologize too for being suspicious too early. OK?

In that case we will be able to move to your other claims, as you have made a number of them.

 

[Buddy]

Free-will is nearly an impossible proof by means of pure science as it appears more of a philosophical argument.

I think ark can also be interpreted as asking for your personal justification for making the statement. How would you support that if someone simply said "no, you're wrong.." and left it at that. IOW, why do you think "that free will, be it an ability or capability, characteristic or capacity, is inherent to all people"? And my question, if you don't mind, is: why does it seem important to say this?

 

[Broken piano]

This is a strange discussion.

I apologized already for my layman knowledge of philosophy and how my comments appear as axioms. Your emotional needs for direct and specific apologies and excuses are irrelevant from my perspective and circumvent the initial point of this topic as a whole. I believe the title if you look back is an attention grabber.

As for trust. I have no reason to trust you either. Nor anyone of each other. You have ignored my questions regarding your specialty and the fact that I have been patient with your implications and undertones. I simply, and respectfully until now, offered participation from an outside point of view to your topic. My experience in the science I research has no bearing on this and my approach, as clearly stated multiple times, is from a personal one. The entire basis of the readings provided and commentary lacks proper evidentiary process and analysis, and is limited in scope.

Please explain before continuing how the devil and free-will from a scientific standpoint can be proved to be a part of the non-human persons an APD persuasion. Perhaps if you reframe your own arguments, or opinions, a productive discussion may resume. Otherwise I do not see any point continuing where I thought open minds coincided.

 

[Buddy]

Broken piano, I think you are simply being asked how you define free will so that we may see why you think it is inherent to all people. You said that this argument is most pertinent to your commentary.

If I may attempt a definition by context, do you refer to points on the general spectrum of inhibitions and moral constraints as most people might understand those terms?

I assume you agree that we all have a responsibility to ensure that when we use words, we are pointing to the same referent(s)?

 

[nicklebleu]

Broken piano,

i concede, that it is difficult to prove the concept of "free will" - if I look around me and read books (e.g. Kahneman's Thinkin Fast and Slow) it seems to me that not many humans possess this quality - or if they possess it, they don't exercise it. In the end it may be that only the individual person himself can judge whether or not he has free will - the problem being that he is unable to transmit what he learned himself to others easily, as the same limitations exist of not being able to easily and adequately reflect one's true inner state to others. Which is the problem with assessing other people, especially in regards to psychopaths.

Now to come back to Ark's remark, the way I see it is, that you are essentially claiming that you are at the same time kind of "intellectually empathetic" (in a sort of detached way), able to change your personality towards more positive engagement with your fellow humans (even if only for some personal, ill-defined advantage) - and a psychopath. Please correct me if this impression is wrong. You probably will realise, that this statement (as reformulated by me and maybe erroneously so) is an extraordinary claim - one that flies in the face of all research on psychopathy. So an extraordinary claim requires an extraordinary proof.

Treatment, Hare says, makes psychopaths just smarter, it increases the range of their abilities, as they learn to understand the functioning of "human beings" better. So why shouldn't I apply this to you, if you really are what you claim, namely a psychopathic personality? And this ties in with Buddy's question: What is your motivation to come here and discuss the topic of free will? Maybe to sharpen your tools?

If your claim is correct that you troll the internet for research and stuff about psychopathy, then you should be familiar with the documentary about Sam Vaknin I, Psychopath. If not, I highly recommend it. To me, and again this is my personal impression and might be wrong, you come across as some sort of Vaknin, who tries to make a career of being a psychopath, skirting the "normalcy" of human beings. For a "human" being this documentary is very painful to watch in regards how expertly Vaknin manipulates EVERYONE around him and leaves a trail of emotional destruction behind him.

My default position in regards to psychopaths are - total avoidance as far as possible. Why, please tell me, should I move away from this position in your case, especially if your claim to psychopathy is true? Because in a impassionate analysis of risk versus benefit, I can see a lot of risk with very little benefit for me ...

 

[Mal7]

The philosopher Kant argued that there was a close connection between freewill and being a moral agent. For Kant, having freewill meant being able to make choice, while also making use of our rationality, for moral reasons. So Kant would not see someone who is able to choose anything at all because they are unfettered by moral deliberations as having more freewill than someone else whose choices are influenced by morality.

Rationality is sometimes defined by philosophers, although the description seems too egocentric and individualistic, as the ability to act with "enlightened self-interest". So a non-moral person could be rational in that sense, and able to choose among various options to gain what interests them. Kant saw moral decisions as giving more freedom than rational but non-moral decisions, as the moral element introduced a new consideration that goes beyond cause-and-effect, means-to-ends calculations.