[andyt]

$1:

Criminal psychopaths learn to respond differently to punishment cues than others in jail and may need more reward-focused treatments, new research suggests.

The findings could have implications both for treating incarcerated psychopaths and to prevent children showing callous tendencies from progressing to psychopathy.

Rather than being "doomed from the womb," Woodworth said the brain is particularly plastic early in life. The biological fact offers an opportunity to intervene in children with conduct disorders before the path to psychopathy is set.

For instance, perhaps children with these tendencies would benefit if their parents stressed rewards for good behaviour instead of just sanctions like timeouts, the researchers said.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/psychopat ... -1.2935438

Sure, the parents are going to take care of this. There's a guy on TED talks who says he's a psychopath, but lives a normal life as a scientist - he just doesn't care about other people. He's managed to channel his psychopathy into positive behavior. He says that negative psychopathy is "turned on" by childhood experiences. Ie the brain is already predisposed to psychopathy, but then it takes a traumatic even to turn on the negative behavior. In psychology this is called diathesis stress, and is thought to play out in all sorts of mental disorders. Depression, say. It also explains why other people, in similar traumatic or stressful situations come out just fine - they don't have the diathesis.

[Delwin]

Interesting. I've always considered psycopathy or human empathy more generally not in terms of black and white but rather a scale. I have personally met people whom I would consider extremely indifferent and although I don't know if they would necessarily qualify as psychopathic, I would confidently say that they were almost completely void of human empathy.

I am still able to get along with people like this. In some cases it is comforting in that, there is a certain honesty with people whom operate strictly on a quid pro quo level. You always know where you stand, kind of like a "You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours", with no expectations outside of that.

I believe the danger arrives not from those who are completely void of feelings but rather those whom have very little feeling. I believe that in some cases it is the search for human feeling that drives borderline psycopaths to act negatively. They must enact a huge amount of cruelty in order to feel any guilt at all and so in a way, the more inhumanely they act; the more human they feel.

[andyt]

Psychopathy absolutely lies on a scale. I would guess the guys they tested were on the more extreme end of it. Many people have psychopathic traits but lead unremarkable lives.

AFAIK, it's not just about empathy but arousal in general. Ie psychopaths don't arouse with what for ordinary people would be strong stimuli. So their actions may in part be an attempt to feel something, but I don't think they are trying to feel guilt.

As far as the whole punishment thing, I thought it had been proven that an intermittent positive reward schedule was the most effective at conditioning behavior. Punishment doesn't really work in reforming criminals even the "normal" ones.

But the idea of intervening with children and using positive reinforcement is important. Just as I said, can't just rely on parents to do it, many of whom will have played a role in the development of psychopathy in the first place. Sorry, tightie righties, but the state needs to get involved.

[Delwin]

I think part of the problem with that is that people whom could be classifed as sociopathic or psychopathic learn from a young age that they are different and how to mask those differences. In some cases, like in the case of Ted Bundy, Paul Bernardo, I would even say Jeffrey Dahmer, they develop false charms and learn how to manipulate the emotions of others.
Society encourages this behavior by sentencing more harshly when it is believed that someone whom has committed a crime "lacks remorse". We also sentence more lightly for "crimes of passion" because of the notion that people are in less control of their faculties when they act out of emotion.

Cold, callous and without remorse is essentially how we define evil. They are made to feel like monsters from a young age and it shouldn't be a surprise when they act like monsters. Maybe they are in fact the very definition of monsters.

I think another interesting note is the fact that far fewer women get diagnosed this way. Is it because women are inherently more nurturing and therefore more likely to experience human emotion ?Or is it that boys are taught from a young age to suppress their feelings ? I tend to believe the latter. From a young age we are taught not to be a sissy and that girls are the emotional ones. Maybe that is not the best approach. Not sure.

[Public_Domain]

[DrCaleb]

Public_Domain Public_Domain:

Our heroes are most likely psychopaths.

Speak for yourself there young'un! Mine are definitely not.

[Unsound]

My hero is Dr. Caleb... So make of that what you will

[DrCaleb]

You just like me in Spandex.

[Public_Domain]

[Thanos]

The sociopath/psychopath personality is probably more widespread among our political and business leadership 'elite' than it is among the general population. The serial-killer type of psychopath is still exceedingly rare, but the kind of people (low-grade sociopaths) that are indifferent to the suffering of others or take some kind of minor pleasure from their decisions harming others (low-grade psychopaths) is a lot more common than most people assume. Believing that the school bully ever 'grows out' of enjoying hurting others is really quite a mistaken assumption to make. Just because they don't turn into Clifford Olsen doesn't mean that they aren't out there causing harm and enjoying it. Even a cursory look at how politics and business is operated, and how they've managed to legally allow themselves to literally get away with almost anything they want, should put to rest any delusional belief that being a vicious asshole isn't highly rewarding.

[DrCaleb]

Public_Domain Public_Domain:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Public_Domain Public_Domain:

Our heroes are most likely psychopaths.

Speak for yourself there young'un! Mine are definitely not.

Well I'm sure we all hope not. My heroes are mostly comedians.

I just figure psychopaths are more likely to get themselves in a position where they are looked up to by some segment of the population.

From what I've read, the truly successful psychopath is the one who knows they are a wolf among sheep, but decide to keep their head down and go through life unnoticed. Then there are those who use their 'gift' to propel themselves into the high life, but they ultimately end up failing because they lacked the scruples to do things the right way. They may be the George Soros / Raj Rajaratnam / Vladimir Putin kind of people, not the Robin Williams / George Clooney kind of people.

Public_Domain Public_Domain:

Anyone historically based like the founding fathers or Marx or whatever I assume absolute madness to be honest. Marx sounds like an autistic drunk.

These kind of curses are rather rewarding sometimes. Probably not all heroes, especially those you closely know, but I do again feel they're more likely to get themselves into the position.

My heros tend to be the kind of people who make out daily life better because of their hard work and utter brilliance, but whos names nobody knows for some odd reason. Mark Tilden, Dean Kamen, Carl Sagan are some of the names I think should be classed as 'superstars' as opposed to Taylor Swift or Beyonce.

[Zipperfish]

Delwin Delwin:

I believe the danger arrives not from those who are completely void of feelings but rather those whom have very little feeling. I believe that in some cases it is the search for human feeling that drives borderline psycopaths to act negatively. They must enact a huge amount of cruelty in order to feel any guilt at all and so in a way, the more inhumanely they act; the more human they feel.

That is the most interesting thing you've ever posted. That's not saying much, because you usually post drivel. Joking. Seriously, I'd never thought of that. Fascinating, thanks.

[Zipperfish]

Delwin Delwin:

I think part of the problem with that is that people whom could be classifed as sociopathic or psychopathic learn from a young age that they are different and how to mask those differences. In some cases, like in the case of Ted Bundy, Paul Bernardo, I would even say Jeffrey Dahmer, they develop false charms and learn how to manipulate the emotions of others.

They've had as much time pretending to be human than we've all had being human.

$1:

Society encourages this behavior by sentencing more harshly when it is believed that someone whom has committed a crime "lacks remorse". We also sentence more lightly for "crimes of passion" because of the notion that people are in less control of their faculties when they act out of emotion.

I agree with this. I think the justice system would be far better off if intent and remorse were removed from the equation. First off, intent and remorse exist in a person's mind, and neither judge nor jury knows what goes on inside someone's head.

Actus reus--the act itself--is all that should be considered by the courts, in my opinion. This would make sentenicing easier and more consistent.

[andyt]

So a life sentence for somebody who caused death by negligence same as a hit man? Life for a 4 y o boy who shoots his sister by accident? I don't agree with intent being taken out of sentencing or even charging.

Remorse - if a judge is going to factor in remorse in the sentence, he should do a lot more investigating than if the accused says some flowery words in court or has a hangdog expression. Remorse is better assessed by the prison system and should influence how soon they get parole.

[Zipperfish]

andyt andyt:

So a life sentence for somebody who caused death by negligence same as a hit man?

What if the hit man is a psycopath? Or FAS? Or delusional? Or has a huge brain tumour? Did he form intent, or did his brain chemcials. I would argue the latter.