We found 77 Reddit comments about The Sociopath Next Door. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
My $0.02 from personal experience. Prior to going into psychology, my previous line of work brought me to work with quite a few narcissists and a couple psychopaths. So the following is based on years of real world experience + my academic understanding of the topic. To answer your question, I'll compare some subtle differences in behavior.
Psychopaths: Their focus is "outward target focused" and getting what they want at all cost, even to the detriment of looking good even initially. Their behavior is more predatory, even from the very first impression. The name of the game is to find out as much information about you as possible to quickly assess if you're a good target and if so what your vulnerabilities are so they can manipulate you and proceed with their goals. They seek out a vulnerable target who is emotionally "weak" or lacking something in their life, do "recon" and get as much information as possible to find their angle, use flattery and slights to keep their target off-balance so they can control them and get what they want. In their initial assessment of you if they see that you're not giving them the information they need or that you're onto their game, you'll be too difficult and they will move on to an easier target. They won't waste their time.
What that looks like in real life:
First impressions with a psychopath: you feel a "bit off." You can't put your finger on why, but you feel a little weird and uncomfortable: it could be an initial awkward silence in them waiting for you to reveal things about yourself (recon), it could be the one-sided self-disclosure (them asking lot of questions about your life without them reciprocating on things like circle of friends, agreeableness, emotional state, your likes and dislikes), it could be the overt flattery playing to your ego and them trying too hard to be just like you, it may even be the very initial awkard non-verbal behavior (eye-contact / fake smile) as they are searching for visual cues on how to physically act / stand /or mimic your behavior to earn your trust. --> All this might make you feel like you can't trust them.
To add to this, though, quickly after, you'll observe them saying an odd phrase here or there that doesn't add up, a compliment followed by a slight directed at you or at someone else ( "Did they really said that??")... all meant to keep their target off balance and under their control. This inconsistent, flattery / insult behavior makes you feel uncomfortable and questioning yourself and also if they're a "good person." Since their main goal is not to look good but to manipulate their target, they don't care as much if they come across as likable if they can manipulate the power dynamic back into their favor.
TLDR: They don't care as much how they're being perceived, likeable or not, just as long as they get what they want, so appearing charming isn't a top goal, just part of the process.
Narcissists: Narcissists, in contrast, have a "self-centered focus," first and foremost, and manipulate people to get what they want second to that. They manipulate people by making themselves look good, keeping the focus on their successes, and by appealing to your sense of wanting to be in with the "cool kids." "I'm going to show you how awesome I am, and you're going to want to be just like me and work for / be friends with me and do what I say because I'm so cool." They're not going to manipulate you because they've studied you and assessed your weaknesses and are preying on your vulnerabilities, like the psychopath (=more calculated behavior). That would be taking away from the focus on them. They're going to manipulate you through showing you how great they are. And because narcissists are focused on themselves, they expect you will, too, (and you most likely will to avoid confrontation, initially) so this keeps them happy and... charming... longer. Narcissists will only lash out or exhibit ugly behavior if their ego is threatened, if the focus isn't on them, if they don't get their way, or if you get in their way.
What this looks like in real life, and why they might appear more charming longer: "Me, me, me!": Narcissists biggest focus is to look good and to keep the focus on them. As such, they know creating a good first likable impression is important so they will focus on dressing well, being well groomed, smiling, appearing pleasant, acting charming, inflating their accomplishments and their connections, and building a fabulous picture of who they are. This all makes them look charming and appeals to your sense of wanting to be in with the top dogs. Unlike psychopaths, they will talk a lot about themselves, both personally and professionally, and won't ask you hardly anything about you unless it relates to their goals. Unlike psychopaths, their focus is not trying to get information on you and figure out their angle. Their focus is on maintaining the appearance of their huge persona. To cultivate a larger than life image, they must form and maintain an entourage of beautiful and powerful people, and this requires that they act charming as much as possible.
Initially what might make you feel uncomfortable is how much they talk about themselves or how little they ask about you, and this throws your spidey sense off guard (makes you not trust them), but because you're not hearing them say horrible things to another person outright, they might seem charming longer.
TLDR: They care very much how they're being perceived. They want to be liked because that's how they create and maintain a grandiose sense of self, and being charming is an important part of this process. They won't get ugly until they absolutely have to. For all these reasons, they might appear charming longer.
Also, assessing what's going on in initial interactions with psychopaths or narcissists is based on awareness (or lack therof) and experience in dealing with them. For example, because I had worked with a bunch of both, I was much more attuned to the behavior and games each would play. Fellow younger grad student friends had knowledge from textbooks, but they lacked real world experience and what their behavior actually looked like in real life, so it was hard for them to see what type of manipulation was going on.
ARTICLES for those of you who asked me:
This Is How To Deal With Psychopaths And Toxic People: 5 Proven Secrets
(includes quotes by Martha Stout)
I like works by American psychologist, Martha Stout: served on clinical faculty at Harvard Med. School for 25 years and is the author of The Sociopath Nextdoor. I like her wording.
20 Diversion Tactics Highly Manipulative Narcissists, Sociopaths And Psychopaths Use To Silence You
7 Stages of Gaslighting in a Relationship
I have a lot more resources on workplace bullying, etc. PM for more. :)
The Psychopath Test and The Sociopath Next Door both touch on the subject that many CEOs express psychopathic qualities or tendencies.
He's a sociopath. That's not an exaggeration. He fits the criteria for sociopath (feel free to annotate criteria with other examples)
My guess about the tapes is he has a hidden camera. It would explain why he asked you about the chair (how'd he know if you fixed it?) This is a good read about sociopaths. I recognized the behavior of an ex when I read it.
I saw Ronson on C-SPAN back then, and it was like he was describing my brother. I read his book, and many others, and sooo many mysteries of my life were explained. It turns out my mother was a psychopath, and two of my siblings inherited it from her. Growing up in a family of psychopaths caused me to think they were the normal ones. And, so, I ended up marrying one. That's all in the past now.
My standard elevator talk about the danger of psychopaths:
(Recommended references are at the end.)
-- I am on a mission to expose the reality of psychopaths. Like David Vincent on the old TV show The Invaders, I know there are predators among us. Like on the show, many people I talk to can't fathom their existence.
-- The words psychopath and sociopath are synonymous today.
Disparate avenues of research came to be understood to have the same subject. (The so-called "official" name, anti-social personality disorder, in DSM-5 is so vague it's meaningless.) The originator of the clinical test for the condition prefers psychopath, and this is what I will use. Also, see the first paragraph of the fifth reference.
-- Psychopathy is a brain defect.
It is not treatable. Their brains are not wired to see humans as anything besides objects to exploit. Their amygdala, the area of the brain that processes emotions, does not function as in a normal brain. That is why they feel no emotions or empathy, although many learn to fake these when it benefits them. (There is also a controversial hypothesis that their mirror neurons are inoperative.) Surprisingly, at least to me, this defect comes with two effects:
Approximately 1/20 people are sociopaths. It doesn't even really make sense to call them mean—they're just enjoying themselves. They're scary and dangerous people.
There's a silver lining, though. That means 95% people aren't sociopaths and have a common and genuine sense of morality, fairness, and justice.
And the giant cloud to go with that silver lining is that, as a survival skill, sociopaths usually become experts at exploiting those tendencies to rope people into protecting them and even becoming complicit in their games.
Not all sociopaths are murderous psychopaths. There's a really good book called The Sociopath Next Door that describes how the unmotivated sociopath could simply just lie and manipulate to get someone to cover his bills, for example.
Edited to correct autocorrect
An excellent book on these types of people: The Sociopath Next Door
It begins, "Imagine - if you can - not having a conscience, none at all, no feelings of guilt or remorse no matter what you do, no limiting sense of concern for the well-being of strangers, friends, or even family members. Imagine no struggles with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish, lazy, harmful or immoral action you had taken. And pretend that the concept of responsibility is unknown to you, except as a burden others seem to accept without question, like gullible fools. Now add to this strange fantasy the ability to conceal from other people that your psychological makeup is radically different from theirs. Since everyone simply assumes that conscience is universal among human beings, hiding the fact that you are conscience-free is nearly effortless. You are not held back from any of your desires by guilt or shame, and you are never confronted by others for your cold-bloodedness. The ice water in your veins is so bizarre, so completely outside of their personal experience, that they seldom even guess at your condition. In other words, you are completely free of internal restraints, and your unhampered liberty to do just as you please, with no pangs conscience, is conveniently invisible to the world. You can do anything at all, and still your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are kept in line by their consciences, will most likely remain undiscovered."
Supposedly 1 in 25 people, or 4% of the U.S. population is like this. Personally, I wish I had been better educated about these types of people and how they operate, because a couple of them really f*cked up my life and almost killed me.
Definitely not buying your book just to find out what your "credentials" are. Let me guess, you read The Sociopath Next Door and deemed yourself an expert?
If you want to get started in understanding these dangerous people, here is an easy but informative book. This is a must read for Parents of young daughters; all that charm that is sooo endearing to most parents, is actually a danger sign.
1 - 4% of the population are sociopaths. Some babies are born without legs or arms. Some are born without the capacity to feel empathy for others. Check out this book for more information.
Some people have done the calculation. There are two ways to acquire resources: Work or plunder. Work is hard, and hard to find. Plunder is comparatively easier in the short run, though it leads to problems in the long run. People who want an easy way out and do not tend to think of the long term impacts, or who feel they have no other options, may opt to plunder.
Lastly, people can be socialized to steal and or rob by people around them. Certain communities and cultures promote theft and other crime for a variety of reasons and with a variety of justifications. Gang culture, for example, and some groups within Romani culture. I once witnessed my own sister, for example, teaching her children to shoplift.
This is an especially valid point when you consider that sociopaths are much more likely than the average person to end up dead as the result of drug or crime related activity, to contract HIV, to end up in prison, to end up incapacitated by other mental illnesses (hypochondria is a common one), and on and on. The majority of them are either dead or "burned out" (suffering greatly from one of the aforementioned consequences) by the time they reach their early 50s. (All info from The Sociopath Next Door, chapter 10.)
So, basically, these terpy terps are willing to literally risk their very lives in order to try to get some pussy.
Good job, idiots.
eh, hate to break it to you, but prior to around 1970, american real wages increased at a steady rate for around 150 years. it has not done so for the last four decades. its more or less due to capitalist bastardry that more women have sought work in those decades than ever before. purely economical. now, the reason they are paid less is pure sexism, no doubt about it. somehow, i agree with both and neither of you.
jackelope: explain PLEASE why it is that so many board-members and CEOs are male and not female. while you are at it, please explain why those men and (though admittedly rare) women are more likely to be sociopathic (like four times more likely)? i would link a torrent site ebook with my citation of this fact but sadly, i cannot find one. here's the link to a fine book supporting my claim. its really good reading though, worth paying for, but if you can d/l, so much the better. open source and all that.
you are talking about the united states, correct silentagony? well, the united states government are inimical to labor and socialism (see the taft-hartley act of 1947 if you doubt me). equal rights are wonderful, but from my perspective, if you are successful, it will only make the oppression of the proletariat that much more diverse. women who win the game of capital do the same fucking thing that the men do, screw over the workers (who i will remind you are at the lower part of the structure of capital and MUCH more likely to be women who are screwed economically and sometimes worse but hey, that's patriarchal capital for you.)
to rmuser: yeah, sexism sure does suck. transsexism is pretty awful as well, perhaps you agree, perhaps not. i experience it and i think it does. the whole fucking thing is terrible and terrifying. wage gaps are wrong, but if they were removed, the proletariat would still be sodomized regardless of sex, gender or rock-and-roll (although i will be the first to admit that cismales are screwed a little less fiercely.)
again, to jackelope: fucking hell, language is VERY FUCKING IMPORTANT. did you even READ 1984? language controls the fucking NARRATIVE goddamnit! thoughtcrime? hell-fucking-o? i say all this because i fervently hope that this angry rant will spark some sense in someone.
fuck it all, there are no commies or anarchists for world peace. some fakers are for a piece of the world, but fuck 'em, they do not represent me...
no, i do not hate any of you, i think you all have valid points but you are all fighting the wrong enemy. theres a good quote from a game of thrones that i feel is relevant (mainly because i am a total ASOIF nerd). Osha (the wildling woman from north of the wall) says: "I tried telling your brother, he's marching the wrong way. All these swords, they should be going north, boy, north, not south."
winter is coming
hell, i do not care anymore about this stupid karma shit (apparently), this infighting is FUCKING STUPID, way to go o my lgbt comrades. if the game is crooked, EVERY FUCKING MOVE IN THE GAME IS FUCKING CROOKED.
There's also The Mask of Sanity, which was a pioneering work in the study of sociopathy. I found it to be comprehensible for the layperson. I'm sure the field of study has moved on since 1941, but the case studies it presents are fascinating. From what I've read, the book by Hare that you suggested is also seminal, though I haven't read it yet. Hare was the one who came up with the Hare Psychopathy Checklist, Revised.
Another one for laypeople: The Sociopath Next Door. It's not a serious academic work and more along the lines of The Psychopath Test, but it's a quick read and very interesting.
"trust, but verify"
One out of 25 people you encounter may be a sociopath, and you probably won't know until it's too late, quite possibly while you are dating them.
You ought to consider reading some books on psychopathy. Might connect a few more dots. Here are a few:
It actually does sound like you're dealing with sociopaths, just less stereotypically competent ones (not everyone can be a brilliant, suave, evil genius after all). An excellent book on the topic I'd suggest is The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout. About 5% is normal, even in the general population.
If it means anything, this isn't abnormal - or perhaps it is, but I'll get to that.
Part of the reason I cheat really isn't about the sex, it's about the power derived from it - knowing that the mom I was with chose to be with me instead of her husband or her children. I think what I truly adore is taking something beautiful - vows, a mother's love, and destroying it simply because I can.
As I write this, I'm sitting in a small apartment that I use as an office in one of my properties. One of my lovers is asleep in bed after a night of fucking. I'm about to go to the gym. When I come back to the office, odds are she will have made me breakfast - it can be a good life sometimes.
Last night I choked her with a necktie as I fucked her ass - and then we held each other lovingly as we both drifted to sleep. I treated her like a whore and a painslut. I gave her what her goofy loser husband never could. But before we slept, she was showing me some pictures of her last overseas business trip with her husband and children. And I got to see her smiling husband and smiling teenage child and briefly wondered if the child would go to college and become a dirty painslut like her mother.
Because, you see, I like to win too, and I always win. You and I may be cut from the some cloth. You may get off on knowing that you are desired above all others. Is it normal? No, not to 98% of the population... but you may be different like me. So I wouldn't worry that much. It may be normal for people like us.
Read ["The Sociopath Next Door"] (http://www.amazon.com/Sociopath-Next-Door-Martha-Stout/dp/0767915828) it may open your eyes to your true potential in life.
Definitely red flags all over the place.
Read the book: the sociopath next door
In it, the author says the #1 thing to look for is someone who wants you to pity them!!
Sounds like this guy has you sticking around out of pity! That’s dangerous. Plus, you are compliant to him: he is looking for that (whether consciously or unconsciously).
You said it back to him “I love you as much as I can right now”.
He knows he can set the pace and you will just follow along with it. That is also dangerous!
From reading your story, it sounds like all he has to do is tell you another sad story, and you’ll stick around to “rescue “ him and help him feel better.
I can’t say he is a sociopath, I’m just saying he sounds like bad news bears !
Be careful! Remember that he can say whatever he wants to say, and you can choose how you feel about him, .... don’t do anything out of pity or guilt for him, because a healthy relationship is never driven by these two emotions. Whether he is dangerous or not, you don’t want to base any relationship on these two emotions.
This doesn’t sound like a good relationship to me, whether or not he is dangerous. Also, you said he doesn’t seem to have many friends, and hasn’t dated in a While .... well, why is that? Sounds like he doesn’t know how to cultivate healthy relationships. Also sounds like he has a victim mentality which is sooooo unattractive. I wouldn’t stick around for whatever he is going to do next.
If you are looking for a line to get out, just say, “I wish you luck in your relationships and your future endeavors, but I’m no longer available to hang out. “
You don’t need to tell him why. You don’t owe him an explanation.
Edit: also, you said you feel something is off about this guy. Pay attention to your instincts! It sounds like something is off.
Yeps. Staying single is going to be the best option. Try to find happiness inside yourself. It helps you a lot through life.
I'm sorry you had to go through all that to get to that point. There's a psychopath.free website in case you're interested. I'm really, really sorry.
I hope at least you are cleared of the infection now and physically healthy. It's a good idea to build yourself up first. But, as a part of the build-up, I recommend you to read this:
Sorry if I am meddling. I hope you get better, and I hope at least your body is OK now. I really wish you a good return to physical and emotional health. And yes, best thing you can do is learn to live on your own and be happy that way. Maybe when you get to that point someone worthy will appear but... don't count on it. Not everyone is worthy, not everyone is marriage-material, or even long term relationship material, so not everyone can get a married happy-ever after. BUT, everyone can get a happy-ever after if they focus on getting it without depending on other people's decisions.
The psychopath will try to manipulate the INTJ like they do everyone else. The INTJ will be too self-absorbed and/or uninterested, and brush aside the psychopath with a lot of "no's" and "that's nice" (LOL). The psychopath will get angry and frustrated. The INTJ at this point will still not know they're dealing with a psychopath. They just think this person is perhaps a little strange.
If the INTJ is lucky it will end there. These psychopath "things" are unbelievable. Horrific. They are like viruses or alien beings. If the INTJ is unlucky (if they are in a vulnerable position, are weak, or insecure) the psychopath will devastate their lives. A lot of people who are psychopath victims will suffer lasting psychological trauma and deteriorate physically. They are so good at mimicking humans it can take years to detect one.
Here are some books I recommend from best to least best (they are all good):
First, good post OP ... much food for thought and quality discussion, thanks
Next: Most people here don't seem to realize that extensive testing suggests 4% of the population fall under the 'sociopathic' tag. In fact that's such a high percentage it has been suggested that "sociopaths" are considered their own 'type' of humans! (Not even ALL "lgbt" people combined make up 2%!)
Short answer; They won't be remedied and we will have problems if we just cut instead of reforming or reducing them, however the rest of the comments explain why they cost too much and the fact something needs to be done.
Long answer; We can't afford them as they currently exist, and they are examples of the federal bureaucracy that has inflated over the years. Unfortunately, most libertarians forget that other people are not principled ethical people like themselves and can't rationalize that society will devolve into savagery if we just ran a libertarian 'free market' system with no ethical controls from the government. They forget that there are cheats, criminals and douchebags that will lie, cheat and steal, and they are the very people that we want out of political office and some of the CEO's of major corporations. They ignore that we are an increasingly connected society and it just takes one or two unethical people to take down entire sectors of our world, and screw over a lot of innocent people now.
I.E. biggest guy, biggest stick rules, back to the feudal days.
While he'll do alot of the same things as Ron Paul, I'm voting for Gary Johnson as I believe he's just a touch more realistic than Ron Paul, or should I say he's not touched in the head.
I do like that the discourse has been raised, just not the way it got the attention of the public.
Have you read/listened to Charles Manson Now? It's pretty fascinating. I listen to the True Murder podcast while I'm at work, and I found out about it there. The audiobook isn't that spectacularly read, but it's interesting to say the least.
For Civil War historical fiction, I fell in love with the Sarah Prine series - These is my Words is the first in that series.
An interesting psych one would be The Sociopath Next Door
I will definitely have to check out James Ellroy! Thank you for the suggestions :)
This is a really interesting read on the prevalence of sociopaths in our society. From bosses to neighbors to colleagues to politicans, I recommend it if you're interested in the subject from a doctors standpoint.
> Take a quick jaunt to prison if you wanna see how “unwanted babies” end up.
People with antisocial personality disorder represent 4% of the general population, according to the book 'The Sociopath Next Door. The percentage of people with antisocial personality disorder in prisons is as high as 80%. And it's not just antisocial personality disorder that is inheritable. Narcissistic personality disorder is as well, along with probably the rest of the cluster B personality disorders.
So people absolutely need to think long and hard before birthing the child of a rapist.
> he’s not a “psychopath” like some Joker wannabe, he’s just very outwardly charming and pleasant while having absolutely zero regard for people.
Reminds me of the book The Sociopath Next Door, which asserts that there are plenty of low-key sociopaths out there, and that they're equally likely to be dumb or lazy as the general population. (As opposed to a Machiavellian Evil Overlord.)
Read this book Psychopaths are rarely serial killers. They are more often teachers, doctors, psychologists, CEO's, and politicians bc they love power.
Tigers can't change their stripes.
Why Does He Do That?
The Sociopath Next Door
These two, if you haven't read them, are game changers. And your friend will need a copy on standby.
Tigers can't change their stripes.
I was reading a book about sociopaths and the author said that when asked, one particular sociopath told her what he wanted from people was pity so he could manipulate them.
From a functional standpoint, there isn't much need to pin down sociopathy vs. psychopathy if he has a diagnosis of ASPD. In addition, you mention that he never actually killed anyone, and that's actually the norm for sociopaths/psychopaths. Very very few kill people. You might want to read this book about the sociopaths we encounter in our daily lives, as well as this other book about living with toxic parents and how to heal from the trauma they inflict. I particularly recommend the second book, I have recommended it to many of my patients (I'm a social worker) as well as friends and I have read it myself, it helped me cope with being raised by parents with subclinical narcissistic personality disorder in an emotionally abusive home.
The Sociopath Next Door is a pretty fascinating book on Sociopaths.
I believe you're looking for this: The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout, PhD. Not the greatest book ever, but worth the read on the topic.
Great (and slightly disturbing) book - http://www.amazon.com/Sociopath-Next-Door-Martha-Stout/dp/0767915828
You say that jokingly but psychopathy and sociopathy are WAY more common than most people realize.
This book has been giving me perspective into what socio/psycho-pathy is https://www.amazon.com/Sociopath-Next-Door-Martha-Stout/dp/0767915828
Agreed. This is a pretty good book explaining the different types of sociopaths and they really are disconnected to the world around them. You nailed it in your comment.
If Hitler ever did show any humanity, it was most likely an act, as sociopaths will mimic emotions and pretend to be moved in an effort to just get what they want.
You forget the other possibility - that the US has more serial killers.
My theory is that it's a combination of "good at capturing" and "has a lot more killers". All references on the subject of sociopaths (example with copuious footnotes) claim that the USA has far more sociopaths per capita than any other country.
There are two complementary hypotheses as to why.
Sociopaths have very little in common in general, but one of the few things they almost all have in common is an abused childhood. The US is the leader in the first world in child abuse.
The other hypothesis is that the strong emphasis on the rights of the individual over society, and the acceptance of public, antisocial behavior by prominent citizens, allows sociopaths to particularly flourish in the United States.
The Sociopath Next Door is a pretty good book that describes sociopaths in our society. It contains direct references to research that gets at the 1 in 25. What the book does very well is give amalgamated case-studies of different types of sociopaths. There are many ways that sociopaths move around in society. From the man who manipulates a lonely woman by fathering a child - he doesn't feel anything for the child - so that he can live an easy life; to the office lady who destroys the careers of those around her that she feels jealous about.
That is not a stupid question. I had a lot of the same questions and this book was really insightful.
> I didn't say they were stupid I said they were criminal.
The vast majority of them were not criminally terrible people. Greed has been pervasive on Wall St. for as long as there has been a Wall St. But no, it wasn't just other people they were ruining financially, it was also their own firms. The firms that a lot of them hoped to run someday. Your narrative assumes an amount of evil and recklessness that I cannot see prevailing among even 20% of the people involved. A Harvard psychologist estimated that sociopaths only make up roughly 4% of the US population.. Assuming a normal distribution of intelligence among the sociopathic population, that leaves only 0.04% of the population that are both sociopathic and in the top 1% in intelligence, which would be 49,414 people out of the total age 35-64 population (123,536,000). In June 2014, there were 1,799,000 people in financial services supervisory roles. So even assuming that every sociopath with top 1% intelligence in the 35-64 age bracket worked as a supervisor in financial services, they would only make up ~2.7% of supervisors (assuming no supervisors under 35, which is mostly true but with some exceptions).
A much more likely assumption is that, for the most part, these people were not evil and reckless. Your stats do not require fraud. We would see the exact same thing if the lenders' executives saw the low appraisals and truly believed that they had to be objectively too low. That petition was signed by 11,000, when there were roughly 83,700 appraisers and assessors of real estate in 2012, after the bubble years. Isn't it possible that the lending executives just disagreed, and as a result appraisers known for being consistently low weren't used as often? Because keep in mind, the lenders knew exactly how much demand there was for mortgages, so the consistently low appraisers couldn't be right.
And as I said before, "liar's loans" can easily be explained by what they saw as a need to get around outdated lending requirements that did not match the "reality" of what they were seeing on paper and in the market. Because why constrain yourself to outdated standards when you are the one taking on the risk and your reasonable calculations for gains in home equity alone say that you are not exposing yourself to excessive risk? In hindsight we know that they actually were exposing themselves to catastrophic risk, but they just didn't know it. But how could they know it if they didn't know how distorted salaries and asset prices had become?
>Psychology is never an exact science but it takes clues from every aspect of your brain
No. Experiments are designed to study a specific behaviour and thus are studied. But that's not the cavet I have. The problem is with pop science writers who make it sound like it is so simple when it actually is not. When you will read actual papers which gave those conclusions, you would find how extremely dependent on many factors their results are(and most mention that). This book is a good example of this trend. It starts with saying that it is not easy to know even for experts whether a person is a sociopath or not, but later from time to time gives handy tools to general public to find out whether someone they know is a sociopath or not.
> but it takes clues from every aspect of your brain and then creates a map of your thoughts.
That map thingy is neurobiology, not psychology.
I recommend reading this book: The Sociopath Next Door
It's one of those books that everyone should read, imo, along with The Gift of Fear
I read "The Sociopath Next Door" and I think the stats in that were 4 in 100 people, so 4%. But how on earth would they even begin to measure this??
Sorry, don't know how to add links in here yet.
It depends on what you mean by "many." The book The Sociopath Next Door discusses the matter in more depth, but a rough estimate by many psychologists and sociologists places the number of sociopaths in the general population at roughly 1 in 25, or about 4 sociopaths for every "normal" person. In certain populations (prison, military, business, and politics) the percentage is estimated to be closer to 8%. Of course, "sociopath" doesn't inherently mean that they are prone to killing, although it will mean that they are incapable of internally feeling bad about it. It means only that they are without conscience, but sociopaths still vary; some prefer to use unprovable lies, psychological warfare, treachery, or other social tools to achieve their ends. Of course, there's some arguments about how accurate these numbers are; some people put the "base" numbers much lower or a little higher, but the ratios are still close.
And indeed, even in the military, sociopaths can have varied behaviors. The commissioned officer that uses his men's lives without a second thought could be a sociopath, or the one that doesn't worry about civilian casualties as long as they don't come back to bite him. In their case, it's not the kill, but the power that matters to them, and they get a greater feeling of power in commanding others than in killing.
So the answer is, yes there are probably more sociopathic killers in the military than in the general population, but still not "many," as compared with the general population. The vast majority of men and women going into the military are going in for some combination of career opportunities, three hots and a cot, college education, family legacy, and patriotic/nationalistic/personally heroic feelings.
This book claims 4%.
You need to read this book http://www.amazon.com/Sociopath-Next-Door-Martha-Stout/dp/0767915828#
Wikipedia says it's 3% in males and 1% in women.
I've also found a bunch of other sources, like this, or this book. It's more than 1% anyway.
EPIC LENGTH WARNING
One way terrible things can happen is for many people to take on small pieces of responsibility for making an evil thing happen. This is all hypothetical and blind guessing with no research into how this hospital happens to be run, so don't take it as analysis, but as a thought exercise, let's say that the hospital is owned by a corporation and the Board of Directors tell the CEO that his job is on the line if he doesn't reduce costs.
Does the CEO say "dump patients?" Does the board say, "CEO, dump patients?" No. The CEO says "Our corporate goal is a XX% reduction in the costs of treating uninsured patients across our network of hospitals."
The CFO now analyzes which facilities have the highest costs and through a chain of intermediaries, tells this facility in Vegas, "YOUR goal is a greater percentage cost reduction, because your costs are overrunning by more than the other facilities' costs do. You are to get this done, period, and it comes directly from the CEO."
The hospital director knows his job is in danger, so he gathers the staff and says, "We need you all to impress upon your teams that the cost of treating uninsured patients must be reduced dramatically. We will reward teams that reduce their cost overruns for uninsured patients." Nowhere in that meeting does he give more than a token mention to the hospital's code of ethics or the Hippocratic oath -- of course, it's a hospital, if you asked him he'd say it went without saying, but the managers hear, correctly, "Forget ethics, we MUST meet this goal or this facility may be closed as too costly."
The department heads go back and tell their teams, "Anyone who is running up big bills for uninsured patients is in danger of being placed on a Performance Improvement Plan. You need to be more cost-conscious. We're spending too much. Find ways to cut costs."
Then in this environment, an uninsured schizophrenic walks in the door for the 17th time off his medication and self-harming again. They know he has family in Iowa. They know the last time he came in, he ran up $35,000 in costs that were denied by Medicaid and were never recovered and written off. Night nurse looks at night doctor looks at night orderly looks at custodial staff, and somehow it's decided that they'll put him on a bus to Iowa, because everyone just got an ass-chewing about costs and someone's going to lose a job if a $35,000 bill that will never be paid gets run up tonight, and then who's supposed to care even for the patients who can pay?
The night staff say, "It wasn't our fault. We just did what we had to do to keep our jobs to keep providing patient care."
The department heads say, "It wasn't our fault. We just told them to watch the costs. We didn't tell them to dump patients."
The director says, "It wasn't my fault. I expected our department heads to explain that the cost-cutting goal wasn't an excuse to violate our Code of Ethics here."
The CFO says, "It wasn't my fault. I just crunched numbers and told them what numbers to hit. I'm just the math guy. I don't make the decisions as to how you hit numbers."
The CEO says, "It wasn't my fault. I just set an ambitious goal to deliver shareholder value by reducing cost overruns throughout our network of care facilities. That's what I'm here for. I'm very disappointed that facility made the decision it did."
The BoD says, "It's not our fault. We invested our own money in this corporation. We just want value for money. All we asked is that the CEO do what we hired him for, and get this business growing by reducing costs."
The President says, "It's not my fault. I tried the public option, and I had to trade it away to get anything at all, because insurers wouldn't budge."
The insurer says, "It's not our fault. We pushed for a national insurance mandate so we can cover every patient. It'll be in effect soon. There may be some continued challenges in delivery of care in the meantime."
The voters say, "It's not our fault. This is all too complicated to understand, and there's nothing we can do about the influence of money in politics. We can't afford higher taxes--we need to save and scrimp already in case we ever need health care, so we don't end up in that position."
And nobody takes responsibility, because nobody made the whole decision, and the person who looked a patient in the eyes and gave him a bus ticket instead of care sleeps soundly thinking they're just a victim of the system--and unfortunately, they're right, because even with a nationwide nursing shortage, the quickest way to lose your job as a healthcare provider is to take personal responsibility for patient outcomes, because that creates costs and liabilities to the hospital.
The Sociopath Next Door
Note that none of these are about the health care industry and only one is about politics at all. They're just about how people work and what kinds of people can do bad things.
and for the record I don't have any connection to any of the authors or publishers or anything similar
Sure it's depressing, but some people are intentionally evil, willing to actively lie to get what they want. They're called sociopaths, and they make up 2-4% of the population. They are defined by a strong personal sense of superiority, a reckless disregard for "little people's rules", a ruthless willingness to screw anyone for personal gain, and a psychotic confidence that they'll be able to lie their way out of any jam. Sound familiar?
> More ad hominems
If I called you a pedantic asshat, and then suggested because you are a pedantic asshat, that you are wrong, that would be ad hominem.
Instead, if I called you a pedantic asshat because of your behavior, that is an observation and while you still may have a point (making it not ad hominem, but it likely has been long since buried in your excessive verbiage trying to understand a very, very simple poster. It's like going out for crab and eating certain legs that you have to wrestle a few minutes for a very small piece of meat. Its there, but totally not worth the effort. Better to choose a different leg instead.
I'm saying I'm not bothering reading what you write because while your first comment had merit as an opinion, the rest of it has descended into pseudo-intellectual crap that is wasting my time.
Oh, and regarding your list (which caught my eye at the end, because like your other replies I didn't waste my time):
> Warren Buffet
No, one of few, talks a good game, but I'd like to see more action.
> Bill Gates
Was for most of his life and didn't become a decent human being until he left M$
> Steve Jobs
One of the most overrated people of all times. If Apple has a complete excess of cash to burn, they could try treating their employees like human being in Asia.
> Mark Zuckerberg
Facebook needs to die and I'm glad to see his stock tanked. Later when I refer to Sociopath, I'd consider him a potential candidate.
> Oprah Winfrey
A genuinely good person, but playing Santa Claus on your TV show isn't everything.
> the Walmart family heirs
Is this even a question? Thanks to Walmart we have companies that are able to enforce wage inequality, shaft their workers and have the state make up for it, trash all smaller competitors and kill downtowns and make it very difficult for vendors as we race to the bottom in pursuit of cheap plastic crap.
We should support Costco and its founders instead.
> Michael Bloomberg
Someone who used their wealth to leverage power in NY city and start a ridiculous and likely ineffectual prohibition campaign against soda.
> the Mars Candy family
Hershey was much better, I visted Hershey in fact. While he didn't let his employees unionize which I disagree with, he did build housing for his employees and not like Levittown row houses, but living spaces with some dignity. I'm well aware other companies also can take care of their employees (usually after they have established market dominance) but Hershey maintained this position from the beginning. Since the founders passing however the company is not quite what it was.
> Steve Ballmer
See Bill Gates, but without the philanthropy
> Larry Page, Sergey Brin
And so we have now "one" main search engine that has permeated throughout the internet, just like we used to have "one" main operating system until Linux and the mobile market helped crack it and Apple got into selling consumer devices.
> Jeff Bezos
About as bad in personality as Steve Jobs and has helped Amazon evade taxes while using computers to turn people into machines much to their physical detriment that will now get worse with their emphasized same day service.
> Michael Dell
Who helped destroy the PC hardware business for countless local vendors along with a handful of other large manufacturers. Karma seems to be paying a visit early because now those manufacturers are in trouble due to manufacturers in Asia. I hope you never need real support on a Dell purchased computer because I've seen there techs have customers unknowingly wipe clean their own hard drives simple because it was convenient, something a local vendor would be far less likely to do.
> are the people you are calling greedy.
No, I never called any of them greedy, but now that you listed them here, I'm happy to barely scratch the surface of their potential appetite for power at the expense of others.
What in numerous exchanges you still fail to take away from the poster is that it doesn't say the 400 ARE greedy is suggests why is it easier to believe that 150+ million are lazy OVER 400 being greedy, and if you have half a brain at all, it's not even really saying that, but challenging the assumption suggesting that it is likely some of both but certainly not JUST the former. The problem is that if many of the 400 are greedy, or power hungry, or can influence industry and government with little relative effort than anyone in the 150+ million, that is a problem.
I'll go you one better than greedy, I'll suggest that some in the 400 may be sociopaths, up to 16 of them to be precise. but likely at lot more since the skills from being a sociopath are also ideal to be a captain of industry.
Here is a convenient list off a random blog that supposedly quotes from the book, but is handy so I'll quote from it
Now, I am not studying this in a university/college, nor am licensed in any way in the psychology field. I merely studying psychology [especially that of the Axis II Cluster B area] because it interests me greatly. So please do not quote me as a professional; I am merely giving my thoughts and opinions here...
Understanding the differences between psychopaths and sociopaths can be hard. It seems that the information on both of them is always changing in some way. Especially when it comes to the term 'sociopath'. I have read numerous books/texts on psychopaths and sociopaths. Both hold many, many similarities, but I have also noticed a big difference between them. To me they are on opposite ends of the spectrum; one holds no empathy, while the other can at times be ruled by it. And I say "at times" due to the fact that generally psychopaths do not comprehend emotions as "normal" people of society do.
Whenever you say the word psychopath around others, they always think of Ted Bundy or Ed Gein; psychopaths that committed horrible acts of murder. And I believe that is due to the media and lack of proper education surrounding such beings. Not all psychopaths are violent individuals, many just manipulate others for personal gain and/or satisfaction. Hmm...sounds much like a sociopath, yes? That is because they both use manipulation. Relying on charisma, lies, and the use of personal information [of others] to bend and break those around them. Destroying others just so they are able to spend more time in the limelight. But then why did I state that one holds no empathy, while the other is ruled by it? Did I not just say, in a way, that sociopaths and psychopaths are unable to feel such things as remorse? Yes, but no...
Sociopaths will manipulate and break those around them for personal gain. Psychopaths will do it for the same reason, but they will also do it because it brings them joy, satisfaction, excitement, and just about any other term synonymous with those. A recent study has brought to light that psychopaths are able to experience empathy. Meaning they can put themselves in another person's shoes and relate to them on an emotional level. [link to article] Sociopaths, I believe, are unable to do such things. The mind of a sociopath is extremely logical; meaning they view the world as though they were overlooking various equations. Whenever an emotional moment is presented to them, they do not react on an emotional level. Instead they observe the situation, note the individual at hand, register their words and their appearance upon speaking them, then they bring to mind various "appropriate" responses, and then respond with what they believe to be the best one. Now to say they are completely "emotionless" is untrue. They can feel the most basic/primal of emotions, but nearly all other emotions are out of their reach.
Many will argue that what I have come to understand/believe about psychopaths and sociopaths is outrageous and completely untrue. Perhaps that is so, but I have read numerous books on these individuals and I feel this is the best understanding I have reached in regards to them. On one end you have a sociopath; calm, cold, calculating, intelligent, manipulative, logical, lacks empathy, performs various actions for personal gain, and uncaring of what their actions will do to others. And then on the other end you have a psychopath: manipulative, disconnected from society, intelligent [at times], capable of feeling empathy toward others, and though they are uncaring of what their actions will do to others, they have been known to "suffer emotional breakdowns/overloads" when something they do affects a person that they "care" for, or if something does not go they way they wanted it too. One day I would very much like to take courses on these individuals, as well as speak with the professionals that have studied them. But till that time, I will continue to read the materials that I find and take my own notes in regards to these beings.
If you would like some more help with understanding them more, I suggest looking for psychology books/texts that pertain solely to them. I will recommend a very good book on sociopaths, it is called: The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout [link to book on amazon]. It is very informative and breaks down the minds/actions of sociopaths very well. It was a book that I was able to understand very well. [some books can get a bit too technical] I hope I was able to help, though I do have a tendency to ramble sometimes. But that is what happens when one talks about a subject that brings them great interest. Amazon has a great selection of books you can choose from that are about psychopaths and sociopaths. So I would greatly suggest turning your search there for more material.
Let me add another one for you to read, The Sociopath Next Door. After reading that, you will think everybody is up to no go.
This subject can't be neatly summed up in a page or passage.
Study the habits of these creatures, and you'll learn to spot them a mile away (in the future).
I mean, he is a CEO and successful businessman (debatable).
You don't get to that level without having sociopathic tendencies.
some great books on this are The Wisdom of Psychopaths and The Sociopath Next Door
No data? We were originally discussing a test by which sociopaths could be detected.
I'm taking my reply from The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout. It's a lot easier to victimize the rest of the population when it's full of people who have consciences and you don't. The people who have consciences automatically assume that a sociopath has one too, and they are reluctant to grasp the horrible truth of the matter. Also, sociopaths are glib, remorseless liars who routinely play the "victim" card, making those with a normal or over-developed sense of responsibility easy marks for their remorselessness.
It's been said about 4% of people are sociopaths.
Sounds like the younger sister is involved with a sociopath, if you want to be subtle, give her The Sociopath Next Door and suggest it as an interesting read; if she is smart she will connect the dots. The author helps the reader identify sociopathic charactistics and how to deal with people you might suspect are high on the sociopathic scale. I would recommend it to you even if you didn't share it with her.
Also, read this book. This was a total game changer for me and my kids, as I gifted them when they were of age.. mid teens. It helped me endure other people that are extremely difficult and it's interesting as hell with some of the stories in it. I think this is what made me say "HOLY FUCK, THERE IS A NAME FOR THIS BEHAVIOR!!!"
You should read the book “the sociopath next door” it really help me come to terms with someone in my life like you describe.
Get this book and read it. It's probably available at your local library.
There's one trait to look for in spotting sociopaths. They will ALWAYS play the victim. As an example, a sociopathic female will complain endlessly about her narcissistic husband, pretending all the while to be a victim of said husband. At no point will she ever admit her victimhood is of her own choosing. She could leave her husband at any point in time, but she would rather continue to exploit the clueless for her own purposes, while playing the victim for all eternity. What this means is, once the perpetual victimhood of a sociopath is spotted, they will appear exceedingly stupid to you, because it is stupid to play the victim when the problem is easily solved by leaving the relationship.
In particular, sociopaths will play the victim after screwing you over. If anyone plays the victim immediately after harming you, it is guaranteed you are dealing with a sociopath.
The response after spotting one is up to you. Setting boundaries is one way to deal with them. For me, bitch-slapping them out of my life is the preferred method, because I have zero interest infecting my life with those who have no empathy.
It might! It is hard to say, because I don't know your sister, but it can't hurt. I also recently picked up The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout.
Martha Stout has a very good book on the subject. See https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/118905-the-sociopath-next-door
The Sociopath Next Door is an eye-opening book and I recommend reading it to everyone. The upshot is that there probably already is a sociopath in your life but you may or may not recognize them.
One of the reasons corporations seem to behave in sociopathic ways is because CEO's often seem to tick most of the boxes to be a sociopath... it seems that being a sociopath makes it much easier to make the sort of hard decisions CEO's have to make. I don't find this terribly comforting, but this is just the way we are set up in the West.
I never did support Avenatti.
You, however, support an objectively disgusting old fraud in Trump.
Here's some more evidence of what a ridiculously corrupt old lunatic he is:
For one thing e's a sociopath. That's not an exaggeration. He fits the criteria for sociopath.
The Sociopath Next Door might be somewhere along the line of what you're looking for.
there are some used copies for under $8
or Dermaphoria - I think I heard this may be a movie soon
thanks for the contest =) I love books!
this book http://www.amazon.com/Sociopath-Next-Door-Martha-Stout/dp/0767915828
Here's a blog dedicated to the daily issues of people with various levels of ASPD. Also, this book is a quite good resource on it.
Can't give you a quick video, haven't come across one.
If you are interested in books like this one I can recommend more. I tend to have an interest in the mental health industry more than individual problems but this book is a good one. People talk about "psychopaths" like they are bond villains but the reality is that you might be working for one.....or married to one.
I don't see your point - you're saying that CEO, Surgeon, and Lawyers are "very common jobs" but I disagree. The only common job there is "sales person" which still isn't that common. But I don't like making arbitrary claims (cough) so i'ma get some numbers...
BLS Employed Persons by Occupation (of our list of psychopaths) in thousands:
The right people... uh huh. People are people. You can't possible know if each and every one of your associates and family are trustworthy. The more confident you are in knowing they are all on the up and up, the more clueless you probably are.
Still, you deserve a prize for the most naive comment I've ever responded to. Hm...
I doubt you'll find the answers you're looking for here. Just read The Sociopath Next Door