Almost a Psychopath!!?

[treesparrow]

This could be seen as an exercise in damage limitation, muddying the waters or just attempting to generally spread confusion about the issue? Maybe all three. The link also includes a 2 part video about psychopathic serial killers (not an easy watch). Maybe reinforcing the idea that all full blown psychos are killers but not touching upon the fact that many are very socially adept, sub criminal types who can carry out callous acts in a more indirect fashion. (As the head honchos of corporations and in governments). The 'almost effect' as outlined in the article below just sounds like a load of old horse hockey to me. The idea that there are 'shades of grey' argument also stinks, there is a clear genetic demarcation between psychopaths- be they socially adept types or serial killers - and the rest of humanity.

I'm sure there are members who can more fully dissect all of this better than my brief overview. :)

Almost Psychopaths Chronically Lie, Manipulate, but Fall Short of a Diagnosis

Chances are you might know someone who is almost a psychopath. The coworker who throws you under the bus. The friend who constantly takes advantage of you. A politician on TV or even some beloved fictional characters. (Think Scarlett O'Hara or J.R. Ewing.)

When people are chronically callous, unreliable and manipulative, they can wreak havoc on those around them, making them what a new book calls an almost-psychopath.

"These are people who are pervasive chronic liars, about things big and small," said Dr. Ronald Schouten, director of law and psychiatry services at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. "They will lie almost reflexively and also engage in very predatory, planned lying. They really enjoy pulling a fast one on other people, and they don't feel bad about doing it."

In their book, "Almost a Psychopath," Schouten and James Silver, a criminal defense attorney and former federal prosecutor, frame psychopathy in the concept of the "almost effect." The idea suggests that mental health problems can exist even if someone doesn't meet the by-the-book definition of a condition, much like people can be pre-diabetic or pre-hypertensive.

Telling lies at times or being occasionally unfeeling is part of the normal range of human behavior. But for almost-psychopaths, these behaviors are the rule, not the exception.

Only about 1 percent of the population are true psychopaths, people who ignore most of society's social and legal mores to meet their own needs, unbound by feelings of guilt or empathy. Perhaps not surprisingly, true psychopaths are well-represented in prisons.

But a larger number of people are almost-psychopaths, operating in the shades of gray between normalcy and true psychopathy. Their behavior is not extreme enough to land them in jail, but they can cause enormous harm to those around them, Silver said.

"We see these people as sliding under the radar in some respects, because they probably won't be incarcerated or identified in a clinical setting, but they're out there causing lots of problems," Silver said.

Far from being on the wrong side of the law, almost-psychopaths might be wildly successful, charming and well-liked, as long as you don't wind up on the wrong side of them. Ken Lanning, a retired member of the FBI's Behavioral Science Unit, calls such people "pillar of the community psychopaths," the politician, doctor or business executive who lies and manipulates others for their own gain.

"If you're trying to run a business or you're in politics, if you're the boss, being a psychopath can really be a positive thing. You can lie, cheat, steal to get what you want," Lanning said.

Psychiatrists agree that even people who don't meet the clinical definition of psychopathy can still be destructive in personal relationships. But diagnosing them might not be necessarily useful.

"In our efforts to understand people, it's very easy to label them, and that doesn't contribute to our understanding of the complexity of human relationships," said Dr. Carol Bernstein, past president of the American Psychiatric Association.

Dr. Igor Galynker, director of the Family Center for Bipolar Disorder at Beth Israel Medical Center in New York, noted that almost-psychopathic tendencies can come in handy for a large number of people in certain situations. A soldier on the battlefield or a corporation's CEO wouldn't do very well if they are unable to make decisions that might harm others. But knowing how to deal with people who do this all the time is important.


"You just need to be aware when you meet these people that they will do what is best for them but not necessarily what's best for you," he said.

The authors said their intention is not to attach labels or psychological diagnoses, but to help people who might be struggling with a difficult, hurtful person in their lives.

Author Silver said, "You're not going to be able to change an almost-psychopath. But the idea is to keep track of their behavior, so that it informs you on how you want to interact with or disengage with these people."

Lanning, formerly of the FBI, said being able to recognize almost-psychopaths will help you protect yourself.

"If you don't understand these psychopathic types," he said, "you'll be easily conned by them."

Link to 2 part video -.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/psychopath-book-ids-subclinical-lying-manipulating-callous-behavior/story?id=16598607#.T-I3H8W1nXX

 

[clearmiddle]

This could be seen as an exercise in damage limitation, muddying the waters or just attempting to generally spread confusion about the issue? Maybe all three. The link also includes a 2 part video about psychopathic serial killers (not an easy watch). Maybe reinforcing the idea that all full blown psychos are killers but not touching upon the fact that many are very socially adept, sub criminal types who can carry out callous acts in a more indirect fashion. (As the head honchos of corporations and in governments). The 'almost effect' as outlined in the article below just sounds like a load of old horse hockey to me. The idea that there are 'shades of grey' argument also stinks, there is a clear genetic demarcation between psychopaths- be they socially adept types or serial killers - and the rest of humanity.

I am not sure why you would say these things; maybe I am about to learn something. But the description you quoted seems similar to the "disturbed characters"" that George Simon writes about from his practice, and that we have discussed here.

So far as I know there is nothing clear about "genetic demarcations". Even if a correlation is found between genetic and/or epigenetic markers and psychopathy, it doesn't prove a causal relationship. You have to look at those same markers in a whole bunch of people that you don't think are psychopaths to even begin to establish a relationship. And how do you know that those in the reference group aren't psychopaths? And how do you keep pathological science from messing with the research?

I am not saying that it can't be done, but from the reports I have heard so far I think it's a long way away.

 

[Renaissance]

I think it does make things kind of confusing, if only because what the authors describe as an 'almost psychopath' can also be the successful psychopath.

 

[clearmiddle]

I think it does make things kind of confusing, if only because what the authors describe as an 'almost psychopath' can also be the successful psychopath.

I think part of the problem is that the whole subject is confusing. The only way I make any sense of it is by imagining a "psychopathological continuum" (or spectrum), but that isn't enough. Martha Stout points out that even those that might appear to be predisposed to psychopathy may be influenced one way or the other by their environment. And of course non-psychopaths can behave like psychopaths while under the influence of them. But the more I read, the more I learn of variations.

In my personal experiences, a very few people have "fit the pattern," while a good many others have fit part of the pattern. But it was amazingly difficult to identify the ones that fit. It's almost like they were surrounded by some kind of field that jumbled my perceptions. But when you feel yourself drained and identify the trail of damage (including personal damage), recognition becomes easier.

One could get the idea that somebody doesn't want us to understand.

 

[Dprang]

I do not believe people can be 'almost' a pyschopath. Perhaps they are socialized enough to avoid the classical definition. I am a grey thinker as opposed to black and white, however, a conscience is a conscience. Pyschopaths do not possess a conscience...at least from all the definitions I have read. If a pyschopath grows up well, he or she may not be the murdering type, yet they kill spirits, don't they?
What seems to muddy the waters about psychopathy is western's society tying to find answers to these conditions. There are so many subsets of mental illness, but in pyschopathy, it seem clear to me that it is the lack of fear and conscience that defines the problem. What we do not know is beyond our comprehension of how this came to be in human nature. That is why it is a puzzle.. thinking human beings who are human predators.
What is unsettling is that fearlessness is admired in our world. It is normal to feel fear..it is our natural protection.

 

[LQB]

I do not believe people can be 'almost' a pyschopath. Perhaps they are socialized enough to avoid the classical definition. I am a grey thinker as opposed to black and white, however, a conscience is a conscience. Pyschopaths do not possess a conscience...at least from all the definitions I have read. If a pyschopath grows up well, he or she may not be the murdering type, yet they kill spirits, don't they?
What seems to muddy the waters about psychopathy is western's society tying to find answers to these conditions. There are so many subsets of mental illness, but in pyschopathy, it seem clear to me that it is the lack of fear and conscience that defines the problem. What we do not know is beyond our comprehension of how this came to be in human nature. That is why it is a puzzle.. thinking human beings who are human predators.
What is unsettling is that fearlessness is admired in our world. It is normal to feel fear..it is our natural protection.

You might want to read "In sheep's clothing". My own thoughts on this is that some non-psychopaths can be so badly damaged and ponorized that they may be indistinguishable from the real monster. Laura has also written quite a bit about possible origins of psychopathy. I'm not sure that knowing the exact origin of psychopathy would help us much at this point. That "fearlessness" is part of the charm they use to disarm.

 

[Jones]

I do not believe people can be 'almost' a pyschopath. Perhaps they are socialized enough to avoid the classical definition. I am a grey thinker as opposed to black and white, however, a conscience is a conscience. Pyschopaths do not possess a conscience...at least from all the definitions I have read. If a pyschopath grows up well, he or she may not be the murdering type, yet they kill spirits, don't they?

Your first sentence is kinda black and white IMHO :)

I don't think I am a psychopath, although I can't be the best judge of that. However, I have identified some area's where my actions are at least ponerised. For example, due to both my genetic make up and less than ideal handling of past trauma's, there are area's where I seem to be lacking in ability to show empathy and I slip up on external consideration. Lack of empathy is a psychopathic trait. So there are perhaps shades of grey that perhaps you hadn't considered?

 

[Nienna]

I do not believe people can be 'almost' a pyschopath. Perhaps they are socialized enough to avoid the classical definition. I am a grey thinker as opposed to black and white, however, a conscience is a conscience. Pyschopaths do not possess a conscience...at least from all the definitions I have read. If a pyschopath grows up well, he or she may not be the murdering type, yet they kill spirits, don't they?
What seems to muddy the waters about psychopathy is western's society tying to find answers to these conditions. There are so many subsets of mental illness, but in pyschopathy, it seem clear to me that it is the lack of fear and conscience that defines the problem. What we do not know is beyond our comprehension of how this came to be in human nature. That is why it is a puzzle.. thinking human beings who are human predators.
What is unsettling is that fearlessness is admired in our world. It is normal to feel fear..it is our natural protection.

Dprang, I agree with you that there are many who are trying to cloud the issue of psychopaths. They are trying to give people the impression that psychopaths can be cured, when in all reality, they can't. But, as we know, there are psychopaths who have taken up the profession of psychologists just for that purpose - confusing people to what a psychopath really is and trying to get them to feel sorry for the psychopath and if they can just try hard enough, they can heal them. This is all very good for psychopaths.

However, as others have mentioned, there is something called ponerology. Have you read Political Ponerology? If not, you really should.

People in a society, such as the U.S., who have been ruled by psychopaths tend to have a great majority that take on the characteristics of psychopathy. Their thinking gets so skewed by psychopaths that they start acting like psychopaths. Take, for instance, corporations. Many psychopaths are drawn to, and do well in, corporate environments and rise to the top. When others take notice of what the psychopath did to get where he got, they emulate him/her. Then, others notice and do the same thing.

So saying that someone can be almost a psychopath, is, actually, true. But a real psychopath is a psychopath - there is no 'almost' about it. And I think that ponerization vs psychopaths really needs to be known by the public so that they can see that actual psychopaths cannot be helped.