I agree with you. The trend now is to lump every disorder together.
As I remember it sociopaths are basically emotionless, but aren't necessarily prone to criminal or violent behavior. It's just that they don't show any empathy, and simply do what they want quite literally.
Psychopaths were similarly lacking emotion, but were much more prone to violence, and criminal activity.
The Autism Spectrum, now encompasses damn near everything now. It's really rather meaningless.
I don't understand the reason for lumping everything together, unless there's some underlying legal ramifications at play. Redefining the terms will result in different legal outcomes.
Also, it might result in more people being diagnosed with mental disorders that result in the loss of rights and freedom. I would imagine that is driving the push to put everything together.
Note: I will murder anyone who disagrees with my opinion. It's nothing personal though. (sarc...) 😉👉
"As I remember it sociopaths are basically emotionless, but aren't necessarily prone to criminal or violent behavior. It's just that they don't show any empathy, and simply do what they want quite literally."
"Psychopaths were similarly lacking emotion, but were much more prone to violence, and criminal activity."
I hope my post cleared this up. Sociopathy was originally indistinguishable from psychopathy. It was just a different word for the same thing, but some preferred it for what I'll call aesthetic reasons. If there's any use for the word sociopathy today, it's only to identify a subset of antisocials who are not psychopathic. And that would imply that they ARE emotional. As I wrote in the post, they're hot-headed, not cold-blooded, like psychopaths.
I agree with this. If a sociopath is armed, goes into a bar, and gets made fun of by another customer, he might draw and shoot, thus becoming a murderer. His feelings were hurt!
A psychopath in a similar situation might ignore the taunt, note it for more discrete handling at a later date, or tell someone else in the bar that the insult was meant for them, thus starting a fight. He's cool and calculating and so gets others killed (or jailed) in preference to himself.
Many, many people carry a pocket knife of some sort wherever they go. Not many people carry swords, granted, but lots of people have tools on them that work for seriously injuring humans, even if it isn't their primary purpose.
Philanthropath is a socio/psychopath masquerading as a philanthropist. (coined by a substacker Margaret Anna Alice.) Thought you may enjoy that term. BG is a perfect example.
This is helping me to think about the phenomenon of people (mainly, but not exclusively, women) who are diagnosed with both Borderline PD and Anti-Social PD. One such young woman is a member of my family, and I believe that diagnosis is accurate.
Such people are often hot-headed, and clearly have access to a broader range of emotions than the psychopath. They are often emotionally dysregulated, they can at least appear to feel wounded, but they go much farther in hurting and exploiting other people that normal range people, and often more than you might think even for a Borderline.
When I contemplate my mother, the closest approximation using DSM language is a full combination of true BPD and Narcissistic PD. But there have been times that she's taken actions that I can't describe in any other way than sociopathic. Apparently conscience-less, and deeply shocking.
But my mother, and the young woman in our family, neither of them are global psychopaths.
This is speculative, but Lobaczewski that that psychopathy was probably dampened in women. (He thought it was an X-chromosome thing.) So it's possible that it does present differently in women. Though on the other hand, there are documented cases of full-blown psychopathic women...
Using the ICD-11 dimensional approach, I think the closest approximation to your mother (based on what you've said about her) would be: dissocial, negative affect, and perhaps anankastic (OCD). One paper I cited ascribes the meanness and narcissism to dissociality, the hot-headedness to negative affect, and the perfectionism and vanity to anakastia (obsessive-compulsive).
Not quite so sure about the Letby case. Can't quite put my finger on why. With serial killers there are usually pulling-the-wings-off-flies signs in childhood, etc. With this one there's nothing.
Having worked on a research project for The Parliamentary and Health Services Ombudsman on the NHS complaints process for about four years, I know first hand that The NHS is a swamp of every kind of 'opathy' you could possibly imagine, and that when something goes wrong in a hospital, managers are just as likely to pin the tail on the nearest donkey as they are to shred documents, destroy files etc, and it now appears that the case is not as clear cut as The NHS and mainstream media would have us believe... https://rexvlucyletby2023.com/
I imagine that has two causes. Firstly, psychopaths are not so impulsive or hot headed, so they don't do the "caught my wife in bed with my neighbor and caved their skulls in with a pole lamp" type murders. Secondly, and very relatedly, they probably don't get caught so much. Something like 75% of murders never get solved, and while a lot of that is gang land type stuff, a fair few are probably really subtle psychopaths who are careful enough to not get caught.
That wasn't super clear. I am suggesting that psychopaths might not be underrepresented in fact when it comes to murderers, but are underrepresented among murders who get caught and found guilty.
I read the article from the bottom up and found the last bits the most helpful. Those who have delved deeper into these materials may benefit from the earlier explanations.
In my training, the psychopath is called the Suppressive Person. This personality is at the root of a subject we call Ethics and Justice. We feel that any public legal system that does not take psychopathy into account is incomplete and faulty.
There is a related phenomenon discovered by Hubbard which he calls the Potential Trouble Source (PTS). This is a person who causes trouble for others by virtue of being connected to a Suppressive Person. The PTS individual is not usually a psychopath, and thus can be cured of their PTS condition. Now these initials have been used by psychiatry for one of their invented disorders. This confuses things for us, which I sometimes think is their primary intent!
I was introduced to the subject of how individuals interact with each other to produce irrational behaviors by Eric Berne, the inventor of Transactional Analysis. Though I believe his theory was too simplistic, it covered some phenomena also described by Hubbard (in his Dianetics work and elsewhere). Hubbard's model of the mind was significantly different than most other models (except maybe Berne's), and so his theory has no obvious analogy among the better known alternatives.
Hubbard postulated the basic mechanism of irrational behavior to be "restimulation." This may be called "triggering" in modern parlance. What gets restimulated (triggered) is an incident stored in the mind but unavailable to the conscious mind. Therapy involves either digging up and confronting the incident until its aberrative influence is eliminated, or strengthening the being so that restimulated incidents will be ignored.
It turns out that certain people are masters of the "art" of restimulating (triggering) others. This should NOT be confused with bad manners or mild teasing (as it often is.). Thus, therapies that handle the mechanism of restimulation are helpful defenses against psychopaths. Meanwhile, we have the option, with examples created by both Łobaczewski and Hubbard, to reform social systems, including the legal system, to better account for the presence of psychopaths in society.
Before I became an Orthodox Christian (at the age of 45!), I (like Fr. Seraphim Rose before me) wandered into all kinds of spiritual blind alleys on my way to the Church.
However, Scientology was not a path which ever interested me. The reason being, that my intuition told me that something was seriously "off" about Hubbard and his organization. For instance, what kind of "church" needs to have a paramilitary arm (SeaOrg) to enforce its will?
Down through the years, I have heard many sinister things about Scientology, usually surrounding how "suppressives" are identified and dealt with. Most of these are of the "he said - she said" variety, and thus impossible to verify. However, there is one indisputable event which has never been satisfactorily explained.
What ever happened to Shelly Miscavige, the wife of Scientology head David Miscavige?
No one seems to know. Even more disquietingly, no one seems to care, either.
Now, how does such a high profile figure just simply disappear? I don't know what powers Scientologists claim to have, but I would be very surprised if evaporation and disincorporealization are among them.
Stories like this yell "Danger, Will Robinson!" at me.
This comment takes the discussion over the edge of acceptability.
What goes on in the private lives of church members and Sea Org members is their personal business. By trying to blow up these private mysteries into condemnation of the entire subject amounts to ad hominem attacks. That is to say, they make absolutely no valid point.
The subject of Scientology exists today independent of its creator and of its protectors, the Sea Organization. The existence of such ridiculous attacks explains why the Sea Org is necessary. And if you knew anything about the subject, you would understand even better.
Scientology deals with the subject of freedom, and freedom has its enemies. The nation of the United States also deals with the subject of freedom, and it also has enemies. These seem to be, broadly speaking, the same enemies that my church faces.
If you don't believe that psychopaths are real, go back to play in your sandbox. If you understand the problem, then you might recognize that it needs a solution. The U.S. suffers today for lack of such a solution. My church exists today because it has a solution. That solution operates in the context of a human group and a very human planet. Not only does it not operate perfectly, but those who are exposed by it (rightly or possibly wrongly) will rail against it like it is the worst evil that ever existed.
It isn't. The Sea Org isn't even armed, and the U.S. is. Enemies of our church just get declared and expelled. What happens to enemies of the nation? We can't even tell, now, if Trump is the traitor, or if the real traitors are those trying to imprison him.
If you would like to help the nation face its problems, you might consider taking some pointers from a system that has been thought out, in place, and has been working for roughly sixty years. Maybe it wouldn't work in other contexts, but I would at least study it.
Or do you prefer things the way they are now, where psychopaths run free to terrorize the general population and suppress real production and real progress?
I asked a perfectly reasonable question, which any normal person would ask, namely "How can a high profile person just disappear?" You did not answer my question, but replied with ad hominem invective, and attempts to change the subject.
In my nearly seven decades of existence on this earth, I have learned that such responses always indicate that my interlocutor has something to hide. This is not a "glitch." It is a "character tell."
When I see a person respond this way in the flesh, I walk away as fast as my feet can carry me. That is what I will now do with you. I will not interact with you again.
A quick thanks mid-workday for providing these definitions, although I will have to read your piece later, Harrison. I did wonder awhile back if knowing the difference between psychopaths and sociopaths - and now, including antisocials - was a prerequisite for getting the most out of your writings. I feel less like a dope now that you’ve included a write up today.
"Psychopaths are cold-blooded and calculating. Non-psychopathic ASPDs are hot-headed and emotional. Psychopaths tend to use primarily instrumental aggression. ASPDs use primarily reactive or hostile aggression." Helpful distinction.
Really interesting and super helpful breakdown of all of the different terms used in the past and in use today with your descriptions very helpful in seeing the sometimes subtle and sometimes vast differences between them Harrison. I learned alot and this lumping together of different disorders also helps to explain why so many people are diagnosed or possibly misdiagnosed with both ADHD and or Borderline Personality Disorder these days!
I can speak to having OCD as it came upon me suddenly at 21 in the ‘80’s when my boyfriend suddenly out of the blue to me at least turned my world upside down and I went into shock while he was calm, rational, told me he’d been planning it for awhile and had found a place to move but was waiting for my stressful family situation to settle down so as to not “overload”me, how considerate NOT! He was as cool as a cucumber while I was intensely upset and bawling my eyes out and in shock as I had not even an inkling. This experience brought on OCD in me almost immediately after and it was so extremely scary because I didn’t know what was wrong with me. I could think rationally yet I couldn’t control the repetitive movements so I hid it from my parents and friends for years and I went through all my student loan money cause I couldn’t go or work. Btw after the breakup I went to see a psychiatrist to help me process it as prior the same boyfriend freaked me out by the way he was speaking about all of us people running around like ants not being capable of holding a thought in our tiny brains, and he seemed to have a private life from the one we shared, a normal person would say I’m going over to Justin’s to hang out for awhile where he never used names just going to “a friends”for awhile and I knew none of his friends. I remember the psychiatrist mentioned grandiose, and said that he was a ticking time bomb and for me to get as far away from him as I could.
He explained the OCD was caused from me feeling like I had no control over my own life, even having a name for it helped a little. At 27 I met my husband and at 30 we got married so I guess I felt confident enough in him to feel I finally had control of my life again and the OCD finally mostly disappeared as suddenly as it had come upon me. I lost from age 21 to 30, I couldn’t wash a sink full of dishes cause I’d be stuck there for hours repetitively washing one plate.. I couldn’t do laundry as I’d get stuck there too, my linen closet was so perfectly aligned, I counted numbers in my head, it was so debilitating for the first 7 years from normal to that seemingly overnight. Thankfully the intensity of it lessened and improved slowly over time as I gained more control over it as I felt I had regained control over my life again.
I learned much later from my mom that my dad had suffered from OCD too by getting up 3 times to wash the kitchen floor shortly after they married not remembering he’d already washed it twice before. His was caused from being a British young officer who went off to war with Germany and he was severely messed up afterwards including suicidal when my mom met him so I must have inherited similar genes and traits to my dad. Guess neither of us had a strong enough constitution to handle extremely stressful situations.
Hopefully people now know exactly what OCD is to at least be able to diagnose themselves. Yeah I gave up my job and my friends and my life in another province for this guy, which is why this was so traumatic for me and why I felt so strongly I’d lost control over my life. No one talked about mental health back then, I had never heard of OCD before. In some ways it’s much better now with awareness of mental health but in other ways it’s worse as it now appears just about everyone suffers from ADHD and is prescribed amphetamine in order to “function normally” which sets up red flags for me.
Hi Harrison. Great article, thanks. I have a question which is tangential to the article; do you think that children who exhibit early symptoms of psychopathy - eg lack of remorse, impulsiveness and an abnormal tendency toward instrumental aggression - are often diagnosed as autistic?
I don't know. I guess it's possible, but the childhood diagnosis would usually be conduct disorder/callous-unemotional traits. I haven't read anything or talked to anyone with experience about it, though.
Sep 15, 2023·edited Sep 27, 2023Liked by Harrison Koehli
Antisocials are clearly, totally different than psychopaths. I can think of three antisocials I knew as a teenager:
> One was a girl skinhead with a chelsea haircut, suspenders and boots. People would ask her if she was a SHARP and she would say "fuck you, sharps are fuckin faggots!" and if someone mistook her for a bonehead, she would say "you callin' me a nazi?" and try to kick their ass. Her dad was an escapee from North Korea who was violent and unstable.
> The second was a gutterpunk with two mohawks that looked like wings, in the style of Keith Flint from The Prodigy. He then shaved off the right one and kept the left, to symbolize his commitment to left-wing politics. This was an excuse to pick a fistfight with anyone who made fun of his wing. His dad was in prison.
> The third had a GIANT afro—the biggest I've ever seen. He was only half-black, so his half-fro was all floppy like Sideshow Bob. It took up so much space that other people couldn't avoid it, and then he would pick a fight with them for "touching his hair." His dad was a Black Panther.
All three of them were violent, remorseless, unable to see fault in their own actions, and 1-dimensional. Their emotional transmission had basically three gears: arrogance ("I'm kickass!") malevolent glee ("Haha what a faggot!") and violent irritation ("Fuck you bitch!").
However, they were NOT psychopathic. They didn't even try to wear a mask of sanity—on the contrary, they purposely broadcast that they were violent nutcases. They understood sarcasm, and they could free-associate in conversation. Their sense of humor was mean-spirited, and they delighted in seeing people get hurt, but they at least understood how jokes work. They didn't seek approval, admiration, or positions of power. They had no spellbinding qualities or "special psychological knowledge". They all ran afoul of the law, were banned from different establishments, and were separated from the normal student body and moved to an alternative school.
The point is, there's no risk of any of these people conning anyone or rising to the top of a pathocracy, but they are useful as thugs and kapos. I think they're different than the 'frontal characteropathy' Lobaczewski describes, which seems closer to BPD (as you've surmised elsewhere).
There's one other kind of 'evil' person that we're overlooking, and that's the moral imbecile. This is someone for whom lack of empathy, insensitivity and emotional immaturity are functions of their general stupidity. But that's a topic for another time.
OK - here is a test for a pscyopath - damn I can't ever spell that word correct....anyhow....here is the simple test that I don't even know myself what I'm about to type next....
1. When is the last time you looked in the mirror?
2. If you did that, what did you think of yourself?
3. If you did not do that, why not?
4. Lets just imagine you are looking in the mirror - what do you sense?
5. Do you want to break the mirror?
~~~
Depending on the answers, I suspect it would be easy to identify the psychopaths, but the reality is they are already know because we know.
Back in the 70s I tried to study psychology and found it appallingly judgemental, based upon assumptions and fear. I put up with it for a season, questioned it and conducted experiments to submit for grades. I disproved enough of it to body-swerve it and swap over to philosophy.
I do not regret that decision. Since then volumes have been written and (undoubtedly) millions have been 'diagnosed' with 'conditions' that are neatly documented in tomes that only the doctors read.
Normal people do not diagnose each other. We deal with difficult people, emotionally stressed people and those who show little empathy all the time without attributing some fancy name to their personality.
If you really think about it - the entire idea of psychological analysis is sociopathic and probably completely inaccurate.
But I would hazard a guess that you will not be able to see it that way.
Psychological can be "sociopathic" (guess you didn't read my definitions!), and can be inaccurate. There's an entire chapter in Ponerology about that. But it is not always, nor necessarily, so.
You say that normal people do not diagnose each other, yet in the next sentence you describe what amounts to a very basic diagnosis. Humans have a natural ability to judge another person's psychology. We can tell whether people are introverted or extraverted, neurotic or stable, empathic or remorseless. Psychology as a science is merely the attempt to systematize and objectify those basic common-sense observations. The problems of clinical diagnosis, and what is done with it, is another issue entirely, and one which can be done responsibly or irresponsibly.
Right. Not sure about your last sentence though. Nevertheless, even Jung talked out the necessity of philosophy, “in preparation for death”--is how he put it; however, Jung missed the mark too with that statement, and continued to wander away in lands of dissonance. He obviously didn’t absorb the philosophies that had been heavily scrutinized, predating, and more enlivened by Plotinus.
Fortunately, in this day in age, it is good to know of about these things that Harrison mentions; however, we must press onward and upward with teleology (also something Jung was right to mention).
Lastly, my mind was saved by the grace of God when I was a boy, when I found myself waking from a coma that was caused by a traumatic brain injury from being hit by a car on my bicycle (while I was wearing a helmet).
That’s what drew me to Harrison’s Mind Matters, and I used to work very briefly for a cannibalistic company called Minds Matter LLC in Kansas, but quit after 4 paychecks. And when the regional coordinator asked if anything was wrong, I told her about forming a positive direction in life as a resolve, and that the TBI people (that the company claims to be helping) are not “consumers”.
She asked me what I would call them, and I said, “I don’t know. Maybe just people.”
The best psychological restructuring or rebuilding for the much needed new foundation of reality, occurs with [an anti-Pharisee version and understanding of] the CTMU, which adds to the KJV and other useful texts.
And I’m no sycophant, and I certainly have learned not to be.
The understanding of the fundamental nature of reality itself, its corresponding relationship with our cognitive stratified identity unto God, “the level of identify that corresponds to reality as a whole, unifying everything therein [...]”, states C. M. Langan, is where we begin for those with eyes and ears to hear. But even then it can be simplified for others, although it cannot be wrong, because that which is false is evil (Plotinus).
I bid you all adieu, and bon voyage.
Remember the Pharisees!
Mark 10:18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
Thanks for the reply. Have a good day anyway. And I don’t work for Satan. Heart is my final message for now. I appreciate the response. Perhaps it is not time.
Note away my friend. I’m just tired of seeing people define/describe the problem instead defining and describing a solution. It was not coming from a place of aggression, hostility, or contempt. What is this? Facebook again? Come on. We are not superior. God is. Love, Love, Love.
Here's the thing. When you come into a comments section, criticize the content, and then claim to have the Big Answer, and will reveal it privately to those who are really interested in The Truth, that's almost always a red flag. I'm writing this on the chance that you're sincere, because 9 times out of 10, that kind of approach is a product of egotism and manipulation. If you have something to say, just say it. Otherwise it is fishing, and off-putting for those who have a bit of experience with the phenomenon.
True guesstimation. I happen to value all of your work that has come across my eyes. I am just trying to get all of us High IQers to really get to crux of the matter in a Yah way. People 9 times out of 10 think me something I am not, and that is still my responsibility, but sometimes, I just want to say what I think.
I am a filmmaker who happens to want to save humanity. All of it. And now I am finding that my potential enemies are actually in the newly evolved High IQ community that needs to grow up too--like I did. It’s ok. We’re smart enough to love each other and everyone else.
Thanks to Langan and all of us--all of us--we have gotten far. And thanks to you too and your coworkers. It helped me in challenging times.
I am not a fake. I have seen “the light that shines forever,” and I am courageously trying to get your attention, and possibly for help with a return project. I’m scared to reveal much of it, here, and that’s why I contacted you this way because I just finished the outline maybe 30 minutes before I saw your new post, so I thought what the heck, I’ll just say it. Freedom of speech right? Just like you.
(in response to "Harrison Koehli" - author here - about "1 hour ago" when he responded to "Eric Hyde" comment).
I've noticed from both commenters and some SubStack authors that there is hostility misdirected or needless confrontation that is not helpful and sometimes these days it is important to not let others "play games" with the place....I mean if face-to-face one could discern the difference, but on a forum just typing.....so I agree with your assessment above Harrison, but it seems that matter is already resolved as I type this edit.
New comment not part of thread. Thanks for a very thorough history of the use of terminology and differences in use. Someone new to the concept reading this may get the impression that psychopaths and sociopaths look scruffy, break the law, don’t have jobs and careers and are shady underworld characters. Maybe some are. But the bigger problem with psychopathy in my opinion is how often I have encountered in my personal and professional life true psychopathy in highly educated, very successful, mostly law abiding individuals. Please read “ Snakes in Suits”
And some of those suits are dresses.
You like these people, they smile, flatter, buddy up. You feel protective of them. If you see through them, you won’t speak up because they’re your boss or a very popular colleague. Sometimes like Humpty Dumpty, they fall.
But often they succeed.
I have a hunch many of them are in leadership positions in our government today. Without a moral center, without enough compassion, Without guilt over doing harm, over lying or about hurting others to get their way. Yes, I think they’ve suceeded.. At least for now.
I couldn’t agree more they hold all sorts of powerful positions that affects millions! They are the reason we are on the destructive course we are on that they set for us.
I am not your friend. And you are not mine. I don't believe you. I don't think you are loving it all. You right in such a way as to be indistinguishable from the covert narcissist. You are vain, egotistical, and you come in cold with hot aggression. I know your type the reference to your IQ is a giveaway.
Unlike you I'm going to be candid. I dislike you. Because of your words and how you present yourself online. I mean to convey hostility to you, because you earned it.
If you don't mind me being possible perceived as flippant, but what was the "fate" of all those tattooed ones in the image at the top of the article?
At the heart of "psychopathy" metaphorically speaking I think the psychopaths amongst us so harmful are disheartening for folks who don't understand how they could be so heartless. But the reality is they are amongst us and if they are not refuted, rebuked, and rebuffed in the present day, then I'm sad to report it likely spells the end of the human species as "we know it"....
"The first group of 2,000 suspected gang members in El Salvador have been moved to a huge new prison, the centrepiece of President Nayib Bukele's self-declared war on crime.
Tens of thousands of suspected gangsters have been rounded up in the country under a state of emergency following a spike in murders and other violent crime."
I agree with you. The trend now is to lump every disorder together.
As I remember it sociopaths are basically emotionless, but aren't necessarily prone to criminal or violent behavior. It's just that they don't show any empathy, and simply do what they want quite literally.
Psychopaths were similarly lacking emotion, but were much more prone to violence, and criminal activity.
The Autism Spectrum, now encompasses damn near everything now. It's really rather meaningless.
I don't understand the reason for lumping everything together, unless there's some underlying legal ramifications at play. Redefining the terms will result in different legal outcomes.
Also, it might result in more people being diagnosed with mental disorders that result in the loss of rights and freedom. I would imagine that is driving the push to put everything together.
Note: I will murder anyone who disagrees with my opinion. It's nothing personal though. (sarc...) 😉👉
"As I remember it sociopaths are basically emotionless, but aren't necessarily prone to criminal or violent behavior. It's just that they don't show any empathy, and simply do what they want quite literally."
"Psychopaths were similarly lacking emotion, but were much more prone to violence, and criminal activity."
I hope my post cleared this up. Sociopathy was originally indistinguishable from psychopathy. It was just a different word for the same thing, but some preferred it for what I'll call aesthetic reasons. If there's any use for the word sociopathy today, it's only to identify a subset of antisocials who are not psychopathic. And that would imply that they ARE emotional. As I wrote in the post, they're hot-headed, not cold-blooded, like psychopaths.
Lack of a “conscience” for me has been one common theme in both sociopaths and psychopaths, emotions or not.
I agree with this. If a sociopath is armed, goes into a bar, and gets made fun of by another customer, he might draw and shoot, thus becoming a murderer. His feelings were hurt!
A psychopath in a similar situation might ignore the taunt, note it for more discrete handling at a later date, or tell someone else in the bar that the insult was meant for them, thus starting a fight. He's cool and calculating and so gets others killed (or jailed) in preference to himself.
But what kind of person goes into a bar with a gun, knife, sword or whatever else???
According to one article, 6 million Americans carry guns. But the bar example was just for illustrative purposes.
For illustrative purposes: I own a hammer. I wouldn't take it to the pub.
Many, many people carry a pocket knife of some sort wherever they go. Not many people carry swords, granted, but lots of people have tools on them that work for seriously injuring humans, even if it isn't their primary purpose.
Interesting. So, sociopaths are supposed to be antisocial, and have poor control of their emotions.
Yeah, and impulsive too.
Philanthropath is a socio/psychopath masquerading as a philanthropist. (coined by a substacker Margaret Anna Alice.) Thought you may enjoy that term. BG is a perfect example.
This is helping me to think about the phenomenon of people (mainly, but not exclusively, women) who are diagnosed with both Borderline PD and Anti-Social PD. One such young woman is a member of my family, and I believe that diagnosis is accurate.
Such people are often hot-headed, and clearly have access to a broader range of emotions than the psychopath. They are often emotionally dysregulated, they can at least appear to feel wounded, but they go much farther in hurting and exploiting other people that normal range people, and often more than you might think even for a Borderline.
When I contemplate my mother, the closest approximation using DSM language is a full combination of true BPD and Narcissistic PD. But there have been times that she's taken actions that I can't describe in any other way than sociopathic. Apparently conscience-less, and deeply shocking.
But my mother, and the young woman in our family, neither of them are global psychopaths.
This is speculative, but Lobaczewski that that psychopathy was probably dampened in women. (He thought it was an X-chromosome thing.) So it's possible that it does present differently in women. Though on the other hand, there are documented cases of full-blown psychopathic women...
Using the ICD-11 dimensional approach, I think the closest approximation to your mother (based on what you've said about her) would be: dissocial, negative affect, and perhaps anankastic (OCD). One paper I cited ascribes the meanness and narcissism to dissociality, the hot-headedness to negative affect, and the perfectionism and vanity to anakastia (obsessive-compulsive).
The paper: https://bpded.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40479-022-00182-0
I also understand Psychopathy as Hare defined it.
Interesting how the majority of murderers are not Psychopaths. Guess they’re all in boardrooms, government, and executive offices 😀
Hospitals... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12285993/The-life-vanilla-killer-Lucy-Letby-Church-goer-dubbed-Innocent-One-friends.html
Sure. This is an example of Factor 2. These psychopaths even though it’s shocking the number of people they negatively affect is limited.
I’m more interested in Factor 1. Those that seek and work in positions of power and affect thousands of millions of people.
A recent example is Richard Sackler.
Yeah. Big Pharma. Benzo's. Poisoner's mentality = Major interesting subject.
Not quite so sure about the Letby case. Can't quite put my finger on why. With serial killers there are usually pulling-the-wings-off-flies signs in childhood, etc. With this one there's nothing.
Having worked on a research project for The Parliamentary and Health Services Ombudsman on the NHS complaints process for about four years, I know first hand that The NHS is a swamp of every kind of 'opathy' you could possibly imagine, and that when something goes wrong in a hospital, managers are just as likely to pin the tail on the nearest donkey as they are to shred documents, destroy files etc, and it now appears that the case is not as clear cut as The NHS and mainstream media would have us believe... https://rexvlucyletby2023.com/
I imagine that has two causes. Firstly, psychopaths are not so impulsive or hot headed, so they don't do the "caught my wife in bed with my neighbor and caved their skulls in with a pole lamp" type murders. Secondly, and very relatedly, they probably don't get caught so much. Something like 75% of murders never get solved, and while a lot of that is gang land type stuff, a fair few are probably really subtle psychopaths who are careful enough to not get caught.
That wasn't super clear. I am suggesting that psychopaths might not be underrepresented in fact when it comes to murderers, but are underrepresented among murders who get caught and found guilty.
I read the article from the bottom up and found the last bits the most helpful. Those who have delved deeper into these materials may benefit from the earlier explanations.
In my training, the psychopath is called the Suppressive Person. This personality is at the root of a subject we call Ethics and Justice. We feel that any public legal system that does not take psychopathy into account is incomplete and faulty.
There is a related phenomenon discovered by Hubbard which he calls the Potential Trouble Source (PTS). This is a person who causes trouble for others by virtue of being connected to a Suppressive Person. The PTS individual is not usually a psychopath, and thus can be cured of their PTS condition. Now these initials have been used by psychiatry for one of their invented disorders. This confuses things for us, which I sometimes think is their primary intent!
I was introduced to the subject of how individuals interact with each other to produce irrational behaviors by Eric Berne, the inventor of Transactional Analysis. Though I believe his theory was too simplistic, it covered some phenomena also described by Hubbard (in his Dianetics work and elsewhere). Hubbard's model of the mind was significantly different than most other models (except maybe Berne's), and so his theory has no obvious analogy among the better known alternatives.
Hubbard postulated the basic mechanism of irrational behavior to be "restimulation." This may be called "triggering" in modern parlance. What gets restimulated (triggered) is an incident stored in the mind but unavailable to the conscious mind. Therapy involves either digging up and confronting the incident until its aberrative influence is eliminated, or strengthening the being so that restimulated incidents will be ignored.
It turns out that certain people are masters of the "art" of restimulating (triggering) others. This should NOT be confused with bad manners or mild teasing (as it often is.). Thus, therapies that handle the mechanism of restimulation are helpful defenses against psychopaths. Meanwhile, we have the option, with examples created by both Łobaczewski and Hubbard, to reform social systems, including the legal system, to better account for the presence of psychopaths in society.
So you don't think David Miscavige is a psychopath?
Why? Do you think he is one? Have you done a Hare profile on him? Is your opinion based on fact or rumor?
I will (reluctantly) weigh in on this one.
Before I became an Orthodox Christian (at the age of 45!), I (like Fr. Seraphim Rose before me) wandered into all kinds of spiritual blind alleys on my way to the Church.
However, Scientology was not a path which ever interested me. The reason being, that my intuition told me that something was seriously "off" about Hubbard and his organization. For instance, what kind of "church" needs to have a paramilitary arm (SeaOrg) to enforce its will?
Down through the years, I have heard many sinister things about Scientology, usually surrounding how "suppressives" are identified and dealt with. Most of these are of the "he said - she said" variety, and thus impossible to verify. However, there is one indisputable event which has never been satisfactorily explained.
What ever happened to Shelly Miscavige, the wife of Scientology head David Miscavige?
https://www.thereset.news/p/exclusive-shelly-miscavige-and-the
No one seems to know. Even more disquietingly, no one seems to care, either.
Now, how does such a high profile figure just simply disappear? I don't know what powers Scientologists claim to have, but I would be very surprised if evaporation and disincorporealization are among them.
Stories like this yell "Danger, Will Robinson!" at me.
This comment takes the discussion over the edge of acceptability.
What goes on in the private lives of church members and Sea Org members is their personal business. By trying to blow up these private mysteries into condemnation of the entire subject amounts to ad hominem attacks. That is to say, they make absolutely no valid point.
The subject of Scientology exists today independent of its creator and of its protectors, the Sea Organization. The existence of such ridiculous attacks explains why the Sea Org is necessary. And if you knew anything about the subject, you would understand even better.
Scientology deals with the subject of freedom, and freedom has its enemies. The nation of the United States also deals with the subject of freedom, and it also has enemies. These seem to be, broadly speaking, the same enemies that my church faces.
If you don't believe that psychopaths are real, go back to play in your sandbox. If you understand the problem, then you might recognize that it needs a solution. The U.S. suffers today for lack of such a solution. My church exists today because it has a solution. That solution operates in the context of a human group and a very human planet. Not only does it not operate perfectly, but those who are exposed by it (rightly or possibly wrongly) will rail against it like it is the worst evil that ever existed.
It isn't. The Sea Org isn't even armed, and the U.S. is. Enemies of our church just get declared and expelled. What happens to enemies of the nation? We can't even tell, now, if Trump is the traitor, or if the real traitors are those trying to imprison him.
If you would like to help the nation face its problems, you might consider taking some pointers from a system that has been thought out, in place, and has been working for roughly sixty years. Maybe it wouldn't work in other contexts, but I would at least study it.
Or do you prefer things the way they are now, where psychopaths run free to terrorize the general population and suppress real production and real progress?
Thank you for exposing yourself.
I asked a perfectly reasonable question, which any normal person would ask, namely "How can a high profile person just disappear?" You did not answer my question, but replied with ad hominem invective, and attempts to change the subject.
In my nearly seven decades of existence on this earth, I have learned that such responses always indicate that my interlocutor has something to hide. This is not a "glitch." It is a "character tell."
When I see a person respond this way in the flesh, I walk away as fast as my feet can carry me. That is what I will now do with you. I will not interact with you again.
Good-bye!
I am sure the readers can decide for themselves who is more sincere and who is less sincere. We are, by the way, almost exactly the same age.
Looks like a duck to me.
Hubbard had an insider's understanding of antisocial behavior.
A quick thanks mid-workday for providing these definitions, although I will have to read your piece later, Harrison. I did wonder awhile back if knowing the difference between psychopaths and sociopaths - and now, including antisocials - was a prerequisite for getting the most out of your writings. I feel less like a dope now that you’ve included a write up today.
"Psychopaths are cold-blooded and calculating. Non-psychopathic ASPDs are hot-headed and emotional. Psychopaths tend to use primarily instrumental aggression. ASPDs use primarily reactive or hostile aggression." Helpful distinction.
Really interesting and super helpful breakdown of all of the different terms used in the past and in use today with your descriptions very helpful in seeing the sometimes subtle and sometimes vast differences between them Harrison. I learned alot and this lumping together of different disorders also helps to explain why so many people are diagnosed or possibly misdiagnosed with both ADHD and or Borderline Personality Disorder these days!
I can speak to having OCD as it came upon me suddenly at 21 in the ‘80’s when my boyfriend suddenly out of the blue to me at least turned my world upside down and I went into shock while he was calm, rational, told me he’d been planning it for awhile and had found a place to move but was waiting for my stressful family situation to settle down so as to not “overload”me, how considerate NOT! He was as cool as a cucumber while I was intensely upset and bawling my eyes out and in shock as I had not even an inkling. This experience brought on OCD in me almost immediately after and it was so extremely scary because I didn’t know what was wrong with me. I could think rationally yet I couldn’t control the repetitive movements so I hid it from my parents and friends for years and I went through all my student loan money cause I couldn’t go or work. Btw after the breakup I went to see a psychiatrist to help me process it as prior the same boyfriend freaked me out by the way he was speaking about all of us people running around like ants not being capable of holding a thought in our tiny brains, and he seemed to have a private life from the one we shared, a normal person would say I’m going over to Justin’s to hang out for awhile where he never used names just going to “a friends”for awhile and I knew none of his friends. I remember the psychiatrist mentioned grandiose, and said that he was a ticking time bomb and for me to get as far away from him as I could.
He explained the OCD was caused from me feeling like I had no control over my own life, even having a name for it helped a little. At 27 I met my husband and at 30 we got married so I guess I felt confident enough in him to feel I finally had control of my life again and the OCD finally mostly disappeared as suddenly as it had come upon me. I lost from age 21 to 30, I couldn’t wash a sink full of dishes cause I’d be stuck there for hours repetitively washing one plate.. I couldn’t do laundry as I’d get stuck there too, my linen closet was so perfectly aligned, I counted numbers in my head, it was so debilitating for the first 7 years from normal to that seemingly overnight. Thankfully the intensity of it lessened and improved slowly over time as I gained more control over it as I felt I had regained control over my life again.
I learned much later from my mom that my dad had suffered from OCD too by getting up 3 times to wash the kitchen floor shortly after they married not remembering he’d already washed it twice before. His was caused from being a British young officer who went off to war with Germany and he was severely messed up afterwards including suicidal when my mom met him so I must have inherited similar genes and traits to my dad. Guess neither of us had a strong enough constitution to handle extremely stressful situations.
Thanks for sharing, sonya. Very interesting! Good to know the OCD went away eventually. That must have been a relief!
Hopefully people now know exactly what OCD is to at least be able to diagnose themselves. Yeah I gave up my job and my friends and my life in another province for this guy, which is why this was so traumatic for me and why I felt so strongly I’d lost control over my life. No one talked about mental health back then, I had never heard of OCD before. In some ways it’s much better now with awareness of mental health but in other ways it’s worse as it now appears just about everyone suffers from ADHD and is prescribed amphetamine in order to “function normally” which sets up red flags for me.
Excellent post, and I learned a lot more than I knew I didn't know. Thank you.
And thank you for inspiring it in Notes!
Hi Harrison. Great article, thanks. I have a question which is tangential to the article; do you think that children who exhibit early symptoms of psychopathy - eg lack of remorse, impulsiveness and an abnormal tendency toward instrumental aggression - are often diagnosed as autistic?
I don't know. I guess it's possible, but the childhood diagnosis would usually be conduct disorder/callous-unemotional traits. I haven't read anything or talked to anyone with experience about it, though.
Thanks for the reply.
Antisocials are clearly, totally different than psychopaths. I can think of three antisocials I knew as a teenager:
> One was a girl skinhead with a chelsea haircut, suspenders and boots. People would ask her if she was a SHARP and she would say "fuck you, sharps are fuckin faggots!" and if someone mistook her for a bonehead, she would say "you callin' me a nazi?" and try to kick their ass. Her dad was an escapee from North Korea who was violent and unstable.
> The second was a gutterpunk with two mohawks that looked like wings, in the style of Keith Flint from The Prodigy. He then shaved off the right one and kept the left, to symbolize his commitment to left-wing politics. This was an excuse to pick a fistfight with anyone who made fun of his wing. His dad was in prison.
> The third had a GIANT afro—the biggest I've ever seen. He was only half-black, so his half-fro was all floppy like Sideshow Bob. It took up so much space that other people couldn't avoid it, and then he would pick a fight with them for "touching his hair." His dad was a Black Panther.
All three of them were violent, remorseless, unable to see fault in their own actions, and 1-dimensional. Their emotional transmission had basically three gears: arrogance ("I'm kickass!") malevolent glee ("Haha what a faggot!") and violent irritation ("Fuck you bitch!").
However, they were NOT psychopathic. They didn't even try to wear a mask of sanity—on the contrary, they purposely broadcast that they were violent nutcases. They understood sarcasm, and they could free-associate in conversation. Their sense of humor was mean-spirited, and they delighted in seeing people get hurt, but they at least understood how jokes work. They didn't seek approval, admiration, or positions of power. They had no spellbinding qualities or "special psychological knowledge". They all ran afoul of the law, were banned from different establishments, and were separated from the normal student body and moved to an alternative school.
The point is, there's no risk of any of these people conning anyone or rising to the top of a pathocracy, but they are useful as thugs and kapos. I think they're different than the 'frontal characteropathy' Lobaczewski describes, which seems closer to BPD (as you've surmised elsewhere).
There's one other kind of 'evil' person that we're overlooking, and that's the moral imbecile. This is someone for whom lack of empathy, insensitivity and emotional immaturity are functions of their general stupidity. But that's a topic for another time.
Great comment.
OK - here is a test for a pscyopath - damn I can't ever spell that word correct....anyhow....here is the simple test that I don't even know myself what I'm about to type next....
1. When is the last time you looked in the mirror?
2. If you did that, what did you think of yourself?
3. If you did not do that, why not?
4. Lets just imagine you are looking in the mirror - what do you sense?
5. Do you want to break the mirror?
~~~
Depending on the answers, I suspect it would be easy to identify the psychopaths, but the reality is they are already know because we know.
~~
BK
Dunno. All the mirrors in my household are female height.
Back in the 70s I tried to study psychology and found it appallingly judgemental, based upon assumptions and fear. I put up with it for a season, questioned it and conducted experiments to submit for grades. I disproved enough of it to body-swerve it and swap over to philosophy.
I do not regret that decision. Since then volumes have been written and (undoubtedly) millions have been 'diagnosed' with 'conditions' that are neatly documented in tomes that only the doctors read.
Normal people do not diagnose each other. We deal with difficult people, emotionally stressed people and those who show little empathy all the time without attributing some fancy name to their personality.
If you really think about it - the entire idea of psychological analysis is sociopathic and probably completely inaccurate.
But I would hazard a guess that you will not be able to see it that way.
Psychological can be "sociopathic" (guess you didn't read my definitions!), and can be inaccurate. There's an entire chapter in Ponerology about that. But it is not always, nor necessarily, so.
You say that normal people do not diagnose each other, yet in the next sentence you describe what amounts to a very basic diagnosis. Humans have a natural ability to judge another person's psychology. We can tell whether people are introverted or extraverted, neurotic or stable, empathic or remorseless. Psychology as a science is merely the attempt to systematize and objectify those basic common-sense observations. The problems of clinical diagnosis, and what is done with it, is another issue entirely, and one which can be done responsibly or irresponsibly.
Right. Not sure about your last sentence though. Nevertheless, even Jung talked out the necessity of philosophy, “in preparation for death”--is how he put it; however, Jung missed the mark too with that statement, and continued to wander away in lands of dissonance. He obviously didn’t absorb the philosophies that had been heavily scrutinized, predating, and more enlivened by Plotinus.
Fortunately, in this day in age, it is good to know of about these things that Harrison mentions; however, we must press onward and upward with teleology (also something Jung was right to mention).
Lastly, my mind was saved by the grace of God when I was a boy, when I found myself waking from a coma that was caused by a traumatic brain injury from being hit by a car on my bicycle (while I was wearing a helmet).
That’s what drew me to Harrison’s Mind Matters, and I used to work very briefly for a cannibalistic company called Minds Matter LLC in Kansas, but quit after 4 paychecks. And when the regional coordinator asked if anything was wrong, I told her about forming a positive direction in life as a resolve, and that the TBI people (that the company claims to be helping) are not “consumers”.
She asked me what I would call them, and I said, “I don’t know. Maybe just people.”
The best psychological restructuring or rebuilding for the much needed new foundation of reality, occurs with [an anti-Pharisee version and understanding of] the CTMU, which adds to the KJV and other useful texts.
And I’m no sycophant, and I certainly have learned not to be.
The understanding of the fundamental nature of reality itself, its corresponding relationship with our cognitive stratified identity unto God, “the level of identify that corresponds to reality as a whole, unifying everything therein [...]”, states C. M. Langan, is where we begin for those with eyes and ears to hear. But even then it can be simplified for others, although it cannot be wrong, because that which is false is evil (Plotinus).
I bid you all adieu, and bon voyage.
Remember the Pharisees!
Mark 10:18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
Yes, but the answer is beyond that. If you care, please contact me. If not, then keep focusing on the drama.
Not taking the bait. But thanks for the comment.
Thanks for the reply. Have a good day anyway. And I don’t work for Satan. Heart is my final message for now. I appreciate the response. Perhaps it is not time.
Your hostility aggression and contempt is noted.
Note away my friend. I’m just tired of seeing people define/describe the problem instead defining and describing a solution. It was not coming from a place of aggression, hostility, or contempt. What is this? Facebook again? Come on. We are not superior. God is. Love, Love, Love.
Here's the thing. When you come into a comments section, criticize the content, and then claim to have the Big Answer, and will reveal it privately to those who are really interested in The Truth, that's almost always a red flag. I'm writing this on the chance that you're sincere, because 9 times out of 10, that kind of approach is a product of egotism and manipulation. If you have something to say, just say it. Otherwise it is fishing, and off-putting for those who have a bit of experience with the phenomenon.
Anyways, I’ll back off. Thanks for all your input. My heart hurts at this moment, and I need to learn something. Thanks.
We all got a lot to learn.
True guesstimation. I happen to value all of your work that has come across my eyes. I am just trying to get all of us High IQers to really get to crux of the matter in a Yah way. People 9 times out of 10 think me something I am not, and that is still my responsibility, but sometimes, I just want to say what I think.
I am a filmmaker who happens to want to save humanity. All of it. And now I am finding that my potential enemies are actually in the newly evolved High IQ community that needs to grow up too--like I did. It’s ok. We’re smart enough to love each other and everyone else.
Thanks to Langan and all of us--all of us--we have gotten far. And thanks to you too and your coworkers. It helped me in challenging times.
I am not a fake. I have seen “the light that shines forever,” and I am courageously trying to get your attention, and possibly for help with a return project. I’m scared to reveal much of it, here, and that’s why I contacted you this way because I just finished the outline maybe 30 minutes before I saw your new post, so I thought what the heck, I’ll just say it. Freedom of speech right? Just like you.
(in response to "Harrison Koehli" - author here - about "1 hour ago" when he responded to "Eric Hyde" comment).
I've noticed from both commenters and some SubStack authors that there is hostility misdirected or needless confrontation that is not helpful and sometimes these days it is important to not let others "play games" with the place....I mean if face-to-face one could discern the difference, but on a forum just typing.....so I agree with your assessment above Harrison, but it seems that matter is already resolved as I type this edit.
I hope so.
BK
New comment not part of thread. Thanks for a very thorough history of the use of terminology and differences in use. Someone new to the concept reading this may get the impression that psychopaths and sociopaths look scruffy, break the law, don’t have jobs and careers and are shady underworld characters. Maybe some are. But the bigger problem with psychopathy in my opinion is how often I have encountered in my personal and professional life true psychopathy in highly educated, very successful, mostly law abiding individuals. Please read “ Snakes in Suits”
And some of those suits are dresses.
You like these people, they smile, flatter, buddy up. You feel protective of them. If you see through them, you won’t speak up because they’re your boss or a very popular colleague. Sometimes like Humpty Dumpty, they fall.
But often they succeed.
I have a hunch many of them are in leadership positions in our government today. Without a moral center, without enough compassion, Without guilt over doing harm, over lying or about hurting others to get their way. Yes, I think they’ve suceeded.. At least for now.
Yes, good points, which I only addressed tangentially in a footnote. That reminds me of a post I did a while ago on psychopathic subtypes which is relevant: https://ponerology.substack.com/p/the-varieties-of-pathocratic-experience
Specifically, the "callous-cunning" subtype.
I couldn’t agree more they hold all sorts of powerful positions that affects millions! They are the reason we are on the destructive course we are on that they set for us.
I am not your friend. And you are not mine. I don't believe you. I don't think you are loving it all. You right in such a way as to be indistinguishable from the covert narcissist. You are vain, egotistical, and you come in cold with hot aggression. I know your type the reference to your IQ is a giveaway.
Unlike you I'm going to be candid. I dislike you. Because of your words and how you present yourself online. I mean to convey hostility to you, because you earned it.
“Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.”
If you don't mind me being possible perceived as flippant, but what was the "fate" of all those tattooed ones in the image at the top of the article?
At the heart of "psychopathy" metaphorically speaking I think the psychopaths amongst us so harmful are disheartening for folks who don't understand how they could be so heartless. But the reality is they are amongst us and if they are not refuted, rebuked, and rebuffed in the present day, then I'm sad to report it likely spells the end of the human species as "we know it"....
So - what side are you on?
BK
"The first group of 2,000 suspected gang members in El Salvador have been moved to a huge new prison, the centrepiece of President Nayib Bukele's self-declared war on crime.
Tens of thousands of suspected gangsters have been rounded up in the country under a state of emergency following a spike in murders and other violent crime."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-64770716