[Cherriesxo]

I knew one. I don't think the percentage of 1% is right though because being a psychopath isn't really that common.

[lightburns]

(Original post by Cherriesxo)
I knew one. I don't think the percentage of 1% is right though because being a psychopath isn't really that common.

I've seen someone use the percentage of 4%. One in twenty-five.

What they're saying, I think, is that the amount of people who live without empathy is very high. They may react different - this isn't saying that 1% or 4% of people are serial killers. This is just saying that they don't have the inner guide that 96% or 99% of the general population have.

If it seems a bit high, consider the fact that 1% of the population has schizophrenia.

[sugar-n-spice]

If psychopathy is a lack of ability to empathise with others and feel guilt, then how come so many take pleasure in actually causing pain? I've heard the idea that to a psychopath there is no difference between the thought of stroking the cat and torturing her, but if you don't care why do either? There has to be something more which separates simply not really caring, from caring in a way which gives pleasure for causing and witnessing pain, doesn't there.

[watami]

Yes, you probably know more than one, but most of them learned to fake the way they act by this age.

[Anonymous]

A short while ago I knew a diagnosed sociopath and i'm really rather glad I don't know them any more (our parting was not amicable).

[TheRandomer]

(Original post by Bellissima)
it would mean it's highly likely I've come into contact with psychopaths, whatever way their psychopathy makes them behave... but if 1/100 people are psychopaths does that mean, in my school of 200 people in each year, at least one of those people were likely to have been psychopaths? and in my entire school which had around 1000 people in... it is highly likely that there was one or more psychpaths?

Ah OP, there was a Horizon documentary about this a while back, you might be able to find it on the internet somewhere or it might be repeated at some point. I found it really interesting! I think the guy doing the documentary found out he actually had pyschopathic traits himself haha, very scary, his family were all like 'yeaaah well you kind of do get angry and lie a lot'

[Anonymous]

(Original post by n00)
Yeah I can see that I wasn't entirely clear in my question, I was going to try and clarify it but saw you had already replied. What I don't understand is that someone so sure of their condition with a full knowledge of what this entails can also be so sure of their own abilities when it seems to me just as or more likely that these perceived abilities are just delusions of grandeur.

Again, I'm not quite sure which abilities you're referring to. I have only stated that I'm aware of my psychopathy and that I am able to hide it quite well from others, at least materially. This last point goes without saying, since I wouldn't be living the life that I live if could tell that I wasn't like them, or more specifically that I was a psychopath.

[n00]

(Original post by Anonymous)
Again, I'm not quite sure which abilities you're referring to.

Aha well nevermind i think i got my answer anyway.

[lightburns]

(Original post by sugar-n-spice)
If psychopathy is a lack of ability to empathise with others and feel guilt, then how come so many take pleasure in actually causing pain? I've heard the idea that to a psychopath there is no difference between the thought of stroking the cat and torturing her, but if you don't care why do either? There has to be something more which separates simply not really caring, from caring in a way which gives pleasure for causing and witnessing pain, doesn't there.

I'd suggest that 'pleasure' is something that is potentially felt. Just like a raw base anger or frustration is possible. It won't have the nuances that one would typically feel, but one can still feel good.

[A Cat]

(Original post by Anonymous)
Again, I'm not quite sure which abilities you're referring to. I have only stated that I'm aware of my psychopathy and that I am able to hide it quite well from others, at least materially. This last point goes without saying, since I wouldn't be living the life that I live if could tell that I wasn't like them, or more specifically that I was a psychopath.

Would you trust yourself to score as close-to-reality as possible on the Hare psychopathy checkpoint?

[Bellissima]

(Original post by Samrout)
Would you trust yourself to score as close-to-reality as possible on the Hare psychopathy checkpoint?

do you feel you have inherited any psychopathic traits from your mother, either genetically or environmentally?

[Anonymous]

(Original post by Samrout)
Would you trust yourself to score as close-to-reality as possible on the Hare psychopathy checkpoint?

I am familiar with the Hare Checklist and have done the test. I don't think many people can score themselves accurately and close to reality most of the time. As I said the questions are too vague and it would probably take an external observer to score someone accurately. However, I think my score does come close enough to reality, with some subjective distortions. For example, I think that I DO have some empathy within certain contexts. So on the Hare Checklist I might check '0' for "lacks empathy". But from life experience, it is clear that I'm just not affected by most human problems and this is heightened by my sadistic tendencies, so clearly my empathy is likely not at a normal level. At first I used to think that everyone was just acting too when I'd see them cry at funerals or become affected by some disaster in some part of the world. But I soon discovered that no, people really do feel bad in such events. So you see the inherent problem with self-scoring?

[A Cat]

(Original post by Bellissima)
do you feel you have inherited any psychopathic traits from your mother, either genetically or environmentally?

looking at the psychopathy checklist as honestly as I can, I don't think I'd score past 1 on many traits. The psychopathy checklist is meant to define internal conduct as opposed to behaviour, which is what the bull**** ASPD concoction does.

Environmentally... I wouldn't think so. I view her with the same contempt she views the humans, and so could not allow myself to be like her. What's a little worrying is that I carry the psychopath gene. None of my siblings are psychos though.

edit: yes in some ways environmentally. The question is, would I view psychopaths with contempt if my mother wasn't a psychopath? Questioning the past and making hypotheticals out of it is quite stupid though.

[A Cat]

(Original post by Anonymous)
I am familiar with the Hare Checklist and have done the test. I don't think many people can score themselves accurately and close to reality most of the time. As I said the questions are too vague and it would probably take an external observer to score someone accurately. However, I think my score does come close enough to reality, with some subjective distortions. For example, I think that I DO have some empathy within certain contexts. So on the Hare Checklist I might check '0' for "lacks empathy". But from life experience, it is clear that I'm just not affected by most human problems and this is heightened by my sadistic tendencies, so clearly my empathy is likely not at a normal level. At first I used to think that everyone was just acting too when I'd see them cry at funerals or become affected by some disaster in some part of the world. But I soon discovered that no, people really do feel bad in such events. So you see the inherent problem with self-scoring?

In what contexts would you say you have had empathy?

I'd say another problem with the PCL-R is that there are some traits which are not exclusive to psychopaths, like impulsivity, sexual promiscuity, grandiose sense of self worth, parasitic lifestyle. Some people might get the wrong idea by not paying attention to the core traits of psychopaths.

[Anonymous]

(Original post by Samrout)
In what contexts would you say you have had empathy?

I'd say another problem with the PCL-R is that there are some traits which are not exclusive to psychopaths, like impulsivity, sexual promiscuity, grandiose sense of self worth, parasitic lifestyle. Some people might get the wrong idea by not paying attention to the core traits of psychopaths.

I could be wrong, but I think the latest version of the checklist does separate out the core/peripheral characteristics into cohorts, so as to make it easier to discern where points are coming from. I'll have to double check. In any case, I think that's enough questioning from you for now. Good day

[A Cat]

(Original post by Anonymous)
I could be wrong, but I think the latest version of the checklist does separate out the core/peripheral characteristics into cohorts, so as to make it easier to discern where points are coming from. I'll have to double check. In any case, I think that's enough questioning from you for now. Good day

why's that then ?

[sugar-n-spice]

(Original post by Samrout)
In what contexts would you say you have had empathy?

I'd say another problem with the PCL-R is that there are some traits which are not exclusive to psychopaths, like impulsivity, sexual promiscuity, grandiose sense of self worth, parasitic lifestyle. Some people might get the wrong idea by not paying attention to the core traits of psychopaths.

What counts as a parasitic lifestyle? Some types of lawyers and accountants are parasites of a sort.

[A Cat]

(Original post by sugar-n-spice)
What counts as a parasitic lifestyle? Some types of lawyers and accountants are parasites of a sort.

lol yes that is a nice term for them. A parasitic lifestyle would be that the psychopath is quite dependent upon another person (or people) in order to be sheltered, fed, and bedded. As in they use others' gains to prop up their wants. Like the son who just won't move out of the family home - but in these cases, I wouldn't say they were all psychopathic at all, as psychopaths would really hate their family for trying to instill senses of justice and honesty into them, and thus leave (or kill them).

[Kazbian]

(Original post by Cherriesxo)
I knew one. I don't think the percentage of 1% is right though because being a psychopath isn't really that common.

(Original post by lightburns)
I've seen someone use the percentage of 4%. One in twenty-five.

What they're saying, I think, is that the amount of people who live without empathy is very high. They may react different - this isn't saying that 1% or 4% of people are serial killers. This is just saying that they don't have the inner guide that 96% or 99% of the general population have.

If it seems a bit high, consider the fact that 1% of the population has schizophrenia.

According to my Psychopathy lectures this year, estimated prevalence of Psychopathy in the general population is 1-3%. In offenders, prevalence is 15%. It's obviously much more common than people think, though as already said very few psychopaths actually go onto kill people. xD Many function well in society.

Anyway, I'm sure all of us have met at least one.

[sugar-n-spice]

I have an question for us.

The anonymous poster I think, who is a psychopath said that he tends to associate with other psychopaths, someone did anyway. My question is why. Think like evolution, groups comprised of people who feel bad for other people empathise and feel guilt for acting in a way which harms the group will out compete groups of people who display psychopathic traits, egoism, parasitic behaviour, not relating to others etc. However a psychopath who infiltrates the normal group will in a great position to take advantage, but the more psychopaths who become part of the normal group the less good it is for the individual psychopath. So surely any psychopath worth his salt should endeavour to isolate and destroy other psychopaths to make it easier to farm off everyone else?