Sociopaths

Post Reply New Topic

If you notice, sociopaths are the masters of small talk. However, when it comes to the discussing the big picture about who they are they can easily be
belittled.

Ooooh, someone is writing about my current special interest.

Must. Post. Now.

My guess is that people with AS may (ironically) have better skills at spotting sociopaths/psychopaths than NT people. Such individuals tend to display remarkable ability at picking up and manipulating social cues. But since people with AS generally suck as social cues (giving and receiving), their theatrics are often wasted on us, and they come off as obviously fake. Personally, I am sometimes baffled at how oblivious many (otherwise intelligent) NT people are to the machinations of people with psychopathic tendencies.

Perhaps HR departments should be staffed with AS people to filter out applicants with psychopathic traits, instead of the current practice of staffing them with NT people to filter out applicants with AS traits?

Another reason why sociopaths/psychopaths are of interest to AS people may be because that both groups have emotional "deficits" relative to NT people. Unfortunately, SNAFU use of semantics have lead some people to believe that empathy = sympathy, and as a result, AS people must be devoid of any emotions, right? This topic has been adressed extensively on WP, so I shall not elaborate any further.



Let's look at some definitions of antisocial traits. 3 commonly used labels exist:

1. Psychopathy
2. Sociopathy
3. Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD)

"Psychopathy" and "Antisocial Personality Disorder" seem to be the categories used most frequently in research and diagnosis (frequently Robert Hare's PCL-R for psychopathy in psychology, and DSM-IV for APD in psychiatry).

The distinction between sociopaths and psychopaths can be made as a question of nature vs. nurture, where sociopaths are conditioned (abusive/absent parents, childhood trauma, etc.) into antisocial behaviour, while psychopaths are born evil and exhibit very little change over time. The terms af often used interchangeably, as the two types may converge on similar types of antisocial behaviour. Biological vs. conditioned psychopathy may have siginificant consequences for rehabilitation of offenders, however. Biological psychopaths are generally considered to be immune to resocialization (some studies even reach the conclusion that resocialization attempts make them *more* likely to reoffend).

"Throw away the key" comes to mind...

APD, on the other hand, is a broader category which focuses solely on antisocial behavior (psychopathy is considered both a personality and a behavioural construct). Most people who are diagnosed as psychopaths also qualify for the APD diagnosis, but it is apparatenly only 50 pct. the other way around. APD has come under attack for lacking an etiology (cause or origin), but this is a charge frequently made against the DSM in general. Just read some of the criticism of the proposed DSM-V.

For clarification, I recommend the "Handbook of Psychopathy" (check on amazon), IMO a tour de force of exceptional quality. Well worth the price tag for scientific content, but a heavy read for some (especially some of the middle chapters on the neurobiology of psychopathy). It is primarily written from the perspectives of psychologists, however, and not psychiatrists, so some tribal warfare is likely to be included.

The authors also point to an emerging consensus that psychopaths are in fact *not* crazy, but that the condition may be a stable personality type, likely brought about by a frequency-dependent evolutionary advantage of being a "cheater". Psychopaths, for instance, do not display a distorted sense of reality, which is often of central importance to the question of diminished capacity or insanity in criminal proceedings. They know very well what damage they are doing to others. They just don't care.

The cheater problem in an evolutionary proces is, by the way, eminently (IMO, at least) described in Robert Trivers' classical work, "The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism" from 1971 (also referenced elsewhere on WP). It also provides some very elegant arguments (in the very last section) for the widespread existence of NT hypocrisy, as outing (whether true or not) other cheaters while subtly cheating yourself can be an adaptive evolutionary strategy.



I consider it possible that the number of psychopaths on the loose in society is lower than in earlier times. Now that both rape and pillaging have been mostly removed from the job description in the armies of the (Western) world, antisocial persons probably have fewer opportunities for gainful employment. And since they often rely on social manipulation to avoid get away with crime (which could work in cases solely depending on testimonies and oral arguments), they are likely to be hampered by modern forensic techniques that rely exclusively on physical evidence and scientific proof. And while Three Strikes Laws or similar provisions might result in grotesque unintended consequences (25 to life for stealing a pizza slice, etc.), they have likely also permanently removed quite a lot of psychopaths from the general populace, as these tend to be serial (and compulsive) offenders.

Those who have the callous nature to cheat and exploit others but not the typical impulsive traits of antisociality (which is why they tend to get caught) might still be very succesful in the workplace. But as demonstrated by Machiavelli, this is nothing new.

Oh, and avoidance seems to be the best way to deal with these people. By trying to engage, confront, persuade, accuse, threaten, placate or challenge them, we are just giving them more options for screwing us over.

I apologize for any grammatical errors. English is not my first language.

... and sorry for not providing links to both the Handbook of Psychopathy and the 1971 Trivers article (the latter is available for free online), but I cannot post urls with fewer than 5 posts...

I wonder if there are sociopaths who completely fake AS just in order to f**k over aspies and to give AS a bad name.

i think theres plenty. Just as there are plenty of people with AS who act more like Xpaths

Lol, seems to be either sociopaths faking AS or stupid doctors diagnosing sociopaths as AS'ers (maybe just for the sake of giving the person a label and be done with it, especially after a sh***y day).

I know a true sociopath who you can't win with. He even got the police believing his stories, and also his boss at work, and he twists everything around to make it look like all his problems are everybody's fault but his, even though he is evil enough to bring on his own problems himself and has everyone around him suffering. Not only he's a sociopath, he's also a convincing liar, a paedophile, a woman-beater, a control-freak, and God only knows what else.

I don't know him as a friend, he just came into our lives, messed up the whole family, took my aunt and her daughter (my cousin), and now we've got the aunt back but the cousin is so brainwashed that she can't come away from him, and he's laughing his head off because he's got life exactly the way he wants it; having a naive young girl under his thumb and lying to everyone in order to get away with it (he did get her as a child, now she's grown-up but still young, and he's in his 50s).

Joe90, if not for your location I'd swear I knew that guy, too.

I'm not really fascinated by sociopaths because, having been trapped in situations where I had to deal with them, I find the subject too disturbing. I didn't always have an ability to detect them but I think I do now. They do seem like the opposite of aspies, to me (not to say that aspies can't be cruel, selfish and violent).

I agree 100%.

I do not agree with this.

It seems like most sociopaths are failures in life.

I feel there is an absolute correlation between low intelligence and being a sociopath.

It is easy to blow a sociopath out of the water. It is necessary to play their own dirty game which most people are not willing to do.

Unfortunately, the current research does not lend decisive support to the claim that sociopaths/psychopaths (once again, I use these terms interchangeably) are less intelligent than the average person. The problem is that high-intelligence sociopaths may be quite succesful at avoiding detection. This means that the "identified" population of sociopaths is likely to be nonrepresentative to the group as a whole. It is a typical statistical problem of self-selection bias.

And the reason why I caution against going head to head against sociopaths in social conflicts is that you will be playing on their turf - Social manipulation...

For instance, I consider Mike Tyson to be an extremely primitive and unsophisticated person... but if I had to challenge him to a contest, I would not choose boxing.... Minesweeper, on the other hand... or Metro 64... Or if it gets mean, and the gloves come off... Tetris....

Oh, and the few traits that NT people in fact admire when it comes to AS are usually honesty, integrity and justice... so playing the dirty game of sociopaths which most people are not willing to do may be a strategy that burns more bridges than it builds.

I really, really disagree and so do most experts on the subject... a REAL, full-blown sociopath is a master of arguments and will win 99.9% of the time. We may see their flawed logic for exactly what it is, but most people don't. Telling them that they're wrong and proving it will accomplish nothing - they'll not only keep going, they'll also seek to destroy you in the process. Deny them anything, you become a threat. Threats are destroyed - utterly.

Most of them aren't what I'd call failures either... almost all I've known had higher positions than me - usually low-to-mid management where their manipulating skills benefit the company most. (I swear, HR knows this and employs them in managment on purpose!)

I am going to restate my beliefs.

I think a lot of sociopaths are failures in life. A disproportionate amount. They may excel in certain areas.

I think even non sociopath NTs get tired of their act after a while and get rid of them.

There's another example of my Aspie naivety. I know a full blown sociopath who seemed to win every argument. I'm the kind of person who will never back down and ended up losing all my 'friends' because they all sided with the sociopath because he was so skilled at verbal BS. Ditto with work. I was 'destroyed' because I directly challenged a sociopath's authority. BIG MISTAKE!! ! I could never understand how anyone could take their arguments silly but once I learned about sociopaths it all made sense.



Yes, about half my managers in retail fit the definition of a sociopath. I could never understand given all the money spent on recruiting how they could have missed that. It was only later I realized that they WANT sociopath managers because they don't form friendships with customers and employees! Sociopaths are ruthless and most normal people would be eaten alive by their own conscience in the same circumstances.

How much experience do you have dealing with them? I'd love to hear your story of how you accomplished this.

Let me return the "hello" from Auntblabby and say that because of this thread, I feel a psychopath obsession coming on and I love it. What is the mystical connection between Aspies and psychopaths!!?

I think it's because socially we're polar opposites from each other... and we both HATE each other for it. I dislike sociopaths for their self-centeredness and willingness to destroy anyone in their path for self-gratification. They probably hate US we have at least some immunity to their manipulation and are foolish enough to challenge them if they're being foolish (which they often are.)

run, imo