If its considered psychopathic to enjoy the suffering of others ...

if you cant be happy like other people then you start to take happines from others pain,thats so normal

"

鬼殺し wrote:

"

Bars wrote:

"

鬼殺し wrote:

Thanks for confirming what I've suspected for a while, Bars. :)

You're not entirely correct, but not entirely wrong either.

And that's how it always works. But I think you're entirely incorrect in what you think I suspect.

This is fun, eh? :)

Not particularly.

About books, haven't read Fallon's book but AFAIK it's a bit tiresome. Kevin Dutton's book, however, is pretty good IMO. I'm quite picky, as you well know, and I read it with interest.

@Aim_Deep: you reminded me of a Cuban comedian, forgot the name, who told the story how he was getting harassed by kids in the school bus since he had a funny accent, went home and complained to his mom how they were stepping on his rights and shit, and his mom said, "Son, you're an immigrant. You have no rights."

To no one's surprise, he did pretty well. I call this mindset the "suck it up, buttercup". These people are tough in the best sense of the word. The polar opposite of entitlement. The funny part is, this was the mindset which made the USA the world's richest country, and it was the American mindset for a long time. Which makes sense, America was built by immigrants.

Psychopathy is just actions born in lack of empathy really, no guilt, no shame (when it should be there) - if concentrated enough in a person we can call them a psychopath, but many actions have psychopathic traits without being done by a person we would label as a psychopath. The severity of transgressions also greatly influence how willing we are to label someone a psychopath as opposed to just being not-perfect like every other human.

And yes, if you genuinely enjoy the suffering of others that have done nothing to you, then it is a psychopathic trait.

We've been impressed in this thread that psychopathy as defect but that is not entirely true.

We are all different on the genetic level but as the result, we are basically the same. It's said that there are some genetic indications which may seen on psychopath and those with such genetic indications but not found as psychopath can be psychopathic under specific conditions.

This suggests us that we've found the cause, which is not entirely wrong, but at same time, this suggests that we've got abilities to accommodate which decides our direction of exclusivity.

He's probably talking about the MAOA gene which can be activated under certain conditions? This doesn't change the fact that primary psychopathy is pretty much set in stone from birth.

"

Bars wrote:

He's probably talking about the MAOA gene which can be activated under certain conditions? This doesn't change the fact that primary psychopathy is pretty much set in stone from birth.

I mean there is no such "murderer gene" and when I say "psychopath", I don't include Puseudobulbar affect.

"

鬼殺し wrote:

What have you read on the matter? This is an interesting angle. Share your sources please. :)

Mostly from cognitive neuroscientists.

And some related to moral philosophy (nothing new either !)
direct link to PDF from
http://www.joshua-greene.net/publications/?offset=1417902960000

"

finisterre wrote:

"

Bars wrote:

He's probably talking about the MAOA gene which can be activated under certain conditions? This doesn't change the fact that primary psychopathy is pretty much set in stone from birth.

I mean there is no such "murderer gene" and when I say "psychopath", I don't include Puseudobulbar affect.

You just graduated from being obscure to making no sense whatsoever. I assume you meant "Pseudobulbar affect", which I had to google and the Wiki article says has nothing to do with what we're talking about. No one was taking about a murderer gene either.

"

Bars wrote:

You just graduated from being obscure to making no sense whatsoever. I assume you meant "Pseudobulbar affect", which I had to google and the Wiki article says has nothing to do with what we're talking about. No one was taking about a murderer gene either.

I thought you were talking about lacking of inhibitory since you mentioned MAOA. I should be using general terms anyway.

"

I don't think I've ever viewed or stated what is still loosely termed as 'psychopathy' as a defect. We're sort of past that, I think. The moment you think of differences or deviations as defects, you're on the first step back towards eugenics. There is no reason to allow a defective thing to exist, objectively speaking.

As Bars said, I was trying to be obscure to making no sense. There is no reason to take psychopathy as something monstrous if we are trying to conceptualize psychopath. (I'm still trying to be obscure.)

"

In the spirit of fair exchange of knowledge, here's one I've been mulling over.

Thank you! It's not quite satisfactory for comparative analysis (since fMRI) but was good read as practical and empirical educational psychology.

I shuddunt edumatate u so I won't. Psychopathic is misused in general2, the term. Enjoy ur ignorance, psycho.

ya u I recognize ur ID, ur weird. 5 pages of educating this guy. real smrt. S M R T.