Says Patric Gagne, author of the memoir "Sociopath," in the interview "What It’s Like to Be a Sociopath" (NYT)(free access link).
"I think my sociopathy is entirely beneficial to me. I see my friends struggling with guilt. On an almost daily basis I think, I’m glad I don’t have that.... Lack of remorse and shame and guilt has been misappropriated to mean this horrible thing, but again, just because I don’t care about you doesn’t mean I want to cause you more pain. I like that I don’t have guilt because I’m making my decisions based on logic, based on truth, as opposed to ought or should. Now, there is a flip side. I don’t have those natural emotional connections to other people, but I’ve never had those. I don’t feel like I’m missing anything. Just because I love differently doesn’t mean my love doesn’t count."
ADDED: Gagne's description of love without emotion made me think of "aromanticism," which came up a couple days ago in the NYT crossword. Rex Parker blogged about it here:
I have a bit of trouble understanding aromanticism as an "identity." Is sociopathy an identity? Should it have a flag? Why would people who lack romanticism even care about belonging to an identity group?
पोस्ट्स
२५ टिप्पण्या:
>I’m making my decisions based on logic, based on truth, as opposed to ought or should.<
As if those two bases were necessarily mutually exclusive. I would submit that they rarely are.
and now that ‘her truth’ is accepted by experts there is no logic and truth so no distinction necessary….
Perhaps there is, as with so many things a "spectrum" of the sociopath. But, again as with so many things, this attempt to normalize sociopaths is alarming to me.
Truth s used to decide? Sure, sure. Since we have all been introduced to the (dismal) concept of "MY truth" the sky is the limit.
And, "... just because I don’t care about you doesn’t mean I want to cause you more pain."
But if there's even a slight benefit to me, and no real downside, if I cause you pain...
"...antisocial personality disorder...". The anti part of that seems more important than he author seems to credit.
"You can be a sociopath and be educated."
Who ever doubted that?
Prisons have a disproportionate amount sociopaths. Mostly on the dumb spectrum, but sociopaths all the same.
Did they interview Hillary for the book?
Oh, wait, she and Bill have always been deeply in love...
From the post:
"I have a bit of trouble understanding aromanticism as an "identity." Is sociopathy an identity? Should it have a flag? Why would people who lack romanticism even care about belonging to an identity group?"
When you're doing identity politics, everything's an identity.
"Bend over, I think I love you," is about as romantic as some guys get, I think.
I’m making my decisions based on logic, based on truth, as opposed to ought or should.
Why am I reminded here of Benjamin Franklin's comment "So convenient a thing to be a reasonable creature, since it enables on e to find or make a reason for every thing one has a mind to do."
No agape in Userland.
The problem with being a sociopath is there will come a point where your logic will tell you that doing the unethical thing is the, obviously, correct choice.
This guy needs to either be put away or run for political office.
This is more defense of Joe Biden, who is obviously a sociopath.
"Why would people who lack romanticism even care about belonging to an identity group?"
Of course, they don't, the very notion is grossly absurd. Nevertheless, creating an identity group is Step One toward creating a grievance group, which leads to politics and further balkanization of our American society, the overarching and universal goal of the American left since Lenin created the Comintern.
The non-violent solution is to attack every nascent grievance eruption with brutal logic (e.g. I don't care how oppressed or offended you feel. It's not my duty to cater to your neuroses.) and savage derision. (e.g. To the changing table with you! You've soiled your diaper once again.)
Furthermore, we need to get over this conflation of romanticism with eros. Sociopathy is not required to be unmoved by Wuthering Heights.
Aromantics of the world
Unite as their flag is unfurled,
Unite without much passion
In touchingly logical fashion.
JAORE said...
Perhaps there is, as with so many things a "spectrum" of the sociopath.
I think psychologists say that one of the personality traits of people is agreeableness, and it is on a spectrum. The more agreeable someone is the more they dislike upsetting people, and the more disagreeable someone is the less they care about upsetting people. Perhaps being a sociopath is just being very very high on the disagreeable side of that spectrum. I think I've heard Jordan Peterson say that after IQ and conscientiousness the best predictor of professional success is how disagreeable someone is.
My father was a very good man who was much more intelligent than he credited himself, for he had a mild form of dyslexia that made him a dreadful speller which was considered a mark of intelligence in his time. He had a wonderful demeanor but was saddled with an innocence that made him enquire about how intelligent men could do evil, especially on an industrial scale like, Mao, Stalin, etc. It genuinely puzzled him.
So when I read "You can be a sociopath and be educated," I think how my father would have been saddened to learn that a sociopath could be educated and remain a sociopath (or worse). Let's just go full Monty and recognize that psychopaths can be well educated too.
At some point in my twenties I realized "Intelligence is not a virtue, merely a tool." Give me my father a thousand times over the far more clever and soulless beings that seem to populate the positions of power.
There's someone for everyone.
"as opposed to ought or should"
Which is why sociopaths are a menace to society. Smoking them out in personal or professional relationships is essential to your wellbeing.
Sociopathy is, to me, characterized by conscience-free nihilism. But there are lots of other definitions. When a key term is ambiguous, the use of that term is only rarely productive. Why not look at the behaviors of potential sociopaths and deal with the behaviors as needed? According to one psychiatry website, these are the behaviors of sociopaths:
Not understanding the difference between right and wrong.
Not respecting the feelings and emotions of others.
Constant lying or deception.
Being callous.
Difficulty recognizing emotion.
Manipulation.
Arrogance.
Violating the rights of others through dishonest actions.
Impulsiveness.
Difficulty appreciating the negative aspects of their behavior.
What's the use in calling such people sociopaths instead of calling them rotten human beings who should be avoided at all costs? The "pathy" suffix makes sociopathy sound like a condition that calls out for medical treatment and accomodation through the ADA. Under this approach, instead of handicapped parking, we should arrange for sociopath parking. Perhaps we already have, in some parts of Manhattan.
What I don’t care about you - The Aromantics
This is really another post about Gavin Newsome, isn't it?
"The "pathy" suffix makes sociopathy sound like a condition that calls out for medical treatment and accomodation through the ADA."
In some cases there's identifiable brain damage right behind the eyes. In other cases there's an unbearably bad childhood that stunted the emotional growth, preventing human attachment. Such as the kids in Eastern European orphanages who were fed and sheltered but never hugged.
"Sociopathy" has been abandoned in favor of "anti-social personality disorder," but the result is the same: dangerous people who ought to be exiled to a far-away island as soon as we know who they are. There's no cure for it; they can only be stopped, not reformed.
The clever ones end up in positions of power. Which explains an awful lot about the condition of the world.
Lem the artificially intelligent said...
What I don’t care about you - The Aromantics
Pretty good Lem...
Remember those mirror boxes that seem to go on forever, deeper and deeper? Well, we've experienced the intellectual equivalent of a mirror box. If you take postmodernism and deconstruction to its logical conclusion, you get this kind detachment from biology, gravity, and outcomes with nasty consequences. If this is a true sociopath rather than someone trying to climb the intersectionality pyramid, watch out for he/she/they will toy with you and then kill you like a cat does to a mouse.
Boy Scout leaders who rape 10-year-old boys have feelings too. :( :( :(
And here, note the proliferation of medieval-style tribal flags. See the UK's War of the Roses and every petty clan leader and kingdom. Every time rationalistic intellectuals try to get one step ahead they inadvertently reinvent the old ways. They might someday even rediscover nature and natural law.
I reject the invented words "cis" and "neurotypical." Keep your opinions to yourself, missy sociopath.
So far, the crimes she admits to having committed are stabbing a child with a pencil and punching another; stealing a car, and continuing to steal groceries as an adult woman and mother.
Her essay is an irrational plea to accept such behaviors not as crimes, but as a part of her personality and diagnosis, something us normies can't understand but we can benefit from by using our precious emotional capacities to understand her. No thanks.
She also ominously hints that stealing groceries is a vanilla (pun, or not pun?) version of her ongoing violations of law and morality.
I guess making fun of Karens cost the NYT some of its most crucial subscription base, so now they're showering some well-off white women with their highest honor: excusing their crimes and inhumanity because they have the root cause of (fill-in-the-blank)(here, sociopathy). Shoot to the top of the victim chart, especially if you end up in the slammer.
Next up: sociopathic transgender asexual throuples. What color is their flag?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा