Psychopathy is an anticoncept

Thumotic proposes that “psychopathy” is an anti concept, created to make men weak.

The definition of psychopathy combines traits that are unlikely to be correlated, for example

1: the ability to endure stress and danger calmly, and the propensity to lie casually without regard to the long term consequences.

2: the propensity to act vigorously and competently in pursuit of goals and the lack of realistic, long-term goals

The concept of psychopathy defines manliness as bad, and men as irresponsible and childlike.

A psychopath is defined as someone who is not a reliable friend, yet I am pretty sure that calmness under stress and danger is a good indication of a reliable friend.

The word “psychopath”, like “racist” is a twentieth century invention. If there were such natural kinds as “racist” or “psychopath”, there would have been words for them in biblical times. Such twentieth century coinages do not cut reality at the joints, but are intended to manipulate and destroy.

Tags:

49 Responses to “Psychopathy is an anticoncept”

  1. Mark Minter says:

    Not necessary.

    I tested for 18 out of 20 checkpoints on one list. The two that I “flunked” were “lying” and “manipulation”. I am not a bad friend. But I would think some man that checks off on a lot of the other ones like “No life plan”, “no guilt or remorse”, “short term marriages”, “impulsiveness”, and quite a few others, might not make very good relationship material.

    I may not plan to fuck you over or lie to you. But if shit doesn’t go well then I am not as bothered as someone else. And yes, when the stress is on, I am very good.

    But I wouldn’t advise women to get into a serious LTR with men that check off on as many as I do.

  2. vxxc2014 says:

    Thanks I feel better now.

    If I’m not lying and can actually feel anything.

  3. Sterling says:

    I think that you do need to be careful in distinguishing the precise clinical definition from the pop-psychology usage of the term. There very well could be something different, rooted in biology, between serial killers and the rest of the population. But this is not what Psychology Today means when they use the term.

    Perhaps it should be looked at not from a masculine / non-masculine perspective but from a high-trust / low trust perspective. It seems that a psychopath in the pop-psychology sense of the word is an individual who realizes that he lives in a low trust society and acts accordingly. Then the similarity of the terms Racism and Psychopath become clear. They are both used to keep the productive segments of the population, those upon whom the current system depends but despises none the less, on the treadmill. The system wishes to prevent this segment from switching from their current high-trust stance to a low-trust one, and hence the alternative stance is pathologized.

    • jim says:

      It is obvious that a serial killer is both braver than the average individual, and less inclined to think long term. It does not follow that people who are brave and prone to short term thinking constitute a natural kind.

      • Occupant says:

        >> It does not follow that people who are brave and prone to short term thinking constitute a natural kind.<<

        On a scale from 1 to 40, a clinical psychopath will score at 27 or above on the PCL-R. Joe Newman, professor of psychology at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, found a discontinuity in information processessing that takes place between a score of 28 and 30 which suggests that psychopaths differ from non-psychopaths not only by degree, but in kind.

  4. Frog Do says:

    Reminds me of the classic British English “anti-social behavior”, what a vague term, as if there is one set of social behaviors in all circumstances. The underlying assumption is bad, that all people are the same and deserve to be treated in exactly the same way. At least psychologists seem to be aware of it (through a mirror darkly) with the accusations of WEIRD science.

  5. Occupant says:

    >> If there were such natural kinds as “racist” or “psychopath”, there would have been words for them in biblical times.<<

    ‘Psychopathy’ maps onto Eysenck’s two-factor model of personality as “emotionally stable extroversion”. Eysenck’s model is, in turn, based on Hippocrates’ four temperaments (of ancient lineage.) According to the Five Factor model (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeability, and Neuroticism) psychopaths score low on Agreeability and Conscientiousness, high on Extroversion and Openness, and intermediate on Neuroticism (which, in this case, means low on the subcategories of Anxiety, Depression, Self-Consciousness and Vulnerability, but high on Angry Hostility and Impulsiveness). The Five Factor model is based on a factor analysis of personality adjectives in the English language (also of ancient lineage).

    John Lackland belonged to a family that claimed descent from Melusine, a She Devil. He was “demon spawn”. Likely King John would have scored high on the Hare Checklist. Similarly, Caligula, who was called “a snake” by his uncle Tiberius.

    ‘Psychopath’ is a new word, but not a new idea.

    • jim says:

      ‘Psychopathy’ maps onto Eysenck’s two-factor model of personality as “emotionally stable extroversion”.

      I am pretty sure it does not. Nor does it correspond to any of Hippocrates four temperaments, nor any combination of them.

      Likely King John would have scored high on the Hare Checklist.

      King John was a hard-working administrator, an able man, an able general, thus clearly a long term thinker. He had terrible interpersonal skills, and a notorious propensity for speaking the truth at inopportune times, so pretty much the opposite of the psychopath formula.

      Similarly, Caligula, who was called “a snake” by his uncle Tiberius.

      Caligula could consistently live a lie for a very long time. That is how he survived, and how he became emperor, whereas the Hare checklist gives us a short term thinker and short term liar, someone who cannot pass for very long. Caligula died of poor interpersonal skills – he kept insulting the captain of the praetorian guard. A psychopath would make sure to keep the praetorian guard on side.

      • Occupant says:

        Occupant:
        >>> ‘Psychopathy’ maps onto Eysenck’s two-factor model of personality as “emotionally stable extroversion”.

        Jim:
        >> I am pretty sure it does not.

        It does.

        Jim:
        >>Nor does it correspond to any of Hippocrates four temperaments, nor any combination of them.

        Eysenck’s two-factor model is Hippocrates’ four temperaments model rebranded. He says so.

        Jim:
        >>King John was a hard-working administrator, an able man, an able general, thus clearly a long term thinker. He had terrible interpersonal skills, and a notorious propensity for speaking the truth at inopportune times, so pretty much the opposite of the psychopath formula.

        King John murdered his nephew, which was considered excessive even at the time. And he made mistresses of married noble women. To say he had terrible interpersonal skills is an understatement. He was a terrible administrator, starting with his misrule of Ireland before assuming the throne, and ending with his civil war against rebel barons after losing near half his kingdom to Phillip II.

        Jim:
        >> Caligula could consistently live a lie for a very long time. That is how he survived, and how he became emperor, whereas the Hare checklist gives us a short term thinker and short term liar, someone who cannot pass for very long.

        Ted Bundy had a high IQ and was capable of long term thought. He was also a psychopath.

        Impulse control is one of the major factors that distinguishes a high functioning psychopath from a low functioning one.

        Jim:
        >> Caligula died of poor interpersonal skills – he kept insulting the captain of the praetorian guard. A psychopath would make sure to keep the praetorian guard on side.

        Caligula murdered people for his own amusement, which is often a strong tell.

      • Alan J. Perrick says:

        Four temperaments are good stuff and seem to have endured where the faddish psychology appears to be falling away as a legitimate authority.

        Best regards,

        A.J.P.

  6. Occupant says:

    >>A psychopath is defined as someone who is not a reliable friend, yet I am pretty sure that calmness under stress and danger is a good indication of a reliable friend<>Thumotic proposes that “psychopathy” is an anti concept, created to make men weak.<<

    There is some overlap between the concept of masculine and the concept of psychopathy. Among the Five Factors, men are less Agreeable than women. Disageeability is a hallmark of psychopathy. Psychopaths are Disagreeable, but not everyone who is Disagreeable is a psychopath.

  7. Occupant says:

    >>A psychopath is defined as someone who is not a reliable friend, yet I am pretty sure that calmness under stress and danger is a good indication of a reliable friend.

    Psychopathy is a constellation of factors. One factor alone is not dispositive. Someone who is calm under pressure probably isn’t a psychopath. Someone who is calm under pressure while stabbing you in the back, probably is.

    • jim says:

      Psychopathy is a constellation of factors.

      The question is: Are the stars of this constellation naturally close together, or does it arbitrarily and artificially link virtues with vices in order to demonize those virtues?

      On the face of it, many of the stars of this constellation do not much look as if they naturally belong with the others.

      • Occupant says:

        >>The question is: Are the stars of this constellation naturally close together, or does it arbitrarily and artificially link virtues with vices in order to demonize those virtues?

        The Five Factors vary independently of each other — that’s why they are the Five Factors. The sub-factors within those Five are less independent of each other.

        Demonization may be a byproduct of how the concept developed. Hervey Cleckley originated the concept in the 40s. Robert Hare developed the concept in the 70s. Hare was trying to describe the violent inmates he encountered as a prison psychologist in Vancouver BC. It’s not surprising that thugs were overrepresented in the initial sample of psychopaths. Since then, Scott Lilienfeld has added to the study of successful psychopaths.

  8. B says:

    Obviously, there are cunning, cruel and deceptive people out there. Generally, of what I’ve seen, they end up sabotaging themselves.

    A cunning person who is prone to short term thinking and short term lying will end up sabotaging himself. But I don’t think cunning is naturally linked to short term thinking.

    And I somehow doubt that calmness under pressure is linked to short term thinking or short term lying or sabotaging oneself.

    • B says:

      I did not write the above comment. Jim, is that you?

      • jim says:

        Oops, sorry, again I pressed the edit button when I meant to press the reply button.

        • B says:

          Calm under pressure is an external behavior which has multiple internal causes.

          Someone who masters his emotions to the point of being calm under pressure is different from someone who genuinely doesn’t care.

          • jim says:

            When a psychopath faces the immediate possibility of harm, I am sure he does care. He just does not let it stampede him.

  9. Beau Geste says:

    Brilliant idea.

    I found that the word “psychopath” is used similarly to words like “unsafe” – emotional rhetoric that leftists use towards people who disagree with them, when they don’t have logical arguments to reply with.

    And of course, leftists tend to disagree with manly men, and tend to specialize in social-pseudoscience. So by a process of meme-selection, it makes perfect sense that they have evolved a weapon to associate their enemies with negative traits. Thus, someone who faces danger calmly or is able to logically analyze social situations as means to an end, also happen to be violent and mad, by grouping them under the same word.

    • vxxc2014 says:

      The personality above save physical courage/violence is actually the academic personality.

      Violence is not madness.

      However if you’re a coward and a weakling it’s in your interests – short term, cunning interests only and against long term survival interests – to paint people who are resolute and even ruthless in tense situations as unstable and mad.

      As to the various traits and the constellation’s relationship we’re probably as usual looking at Leftist Confessions and neurosis projecting onto others. If you take out violence – which academia selected itself out of during conscription as they’re cowards – if you take out violence/courage you’re actually looking at an academic personality.

      • jim says:

        I think you meant to say that the “psychopathic” personality is the opposite of the academic personality, reflecting academics demonizing those different from themselves.

        • peppermint says:

          Speaking of ‘academic personality’, Lothrop Stoddard has this weird verbal tic where he refers to various simian species as ‘under White tutelage’. It’s really effeminate of him to so anthropomorphize them, and probably presages the rise of increasingly overt homosexuality and translesbianism among the academic élite.

  10. […] Jim over at Jim’s blog had some comments on psychopathy. Curious comments. Not even wrong comm…. […]

  11. OldStudent says:

    Warrior Suicides
    http://youtu.be/xANPeeXAfmE

  12. Sam says:

    Psychopaths are a genetic adaptation in humans to prey off the mass of humans who have empathy. Empathy is a genetic adaptation that has made humans successful. Without the empathic to prey on the psychopaths have no society.

    Societies have been destroyed by psychopaths. An example is Alcibiades. Alcibiades went from city to city in the ancient world. In Sparta he was more Spartan than the Spartans. Changing his chameleon skin every time he moved somewhere else and betraying everyone he came in contact with. Alcibiades killed Athens with risky schemes to glorify himself.

    http://www.ancient.eu.com/Alcibiades/

    One thing not widely known is King Agis hated Alcibiades because Alcibiades had a child by the Kings wife.

    Maybe they didn’t have a name for psychopaths but they knew what they were. Plutarch wrote that,”…So undecided was public opinion about Alcibiades, by reason of the unevenness of his nature…”

    “Unevenness of his nature”.

    http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Lives/Alcibiades*.html

    There’s also another group of psychopaths causing great damage all over the planet. The Jews are a tribe of psychopaths. Not every single one but a very large amount compared to people who are not Jews.

    If you assume the Jews are a tribe of psychopaths you’ll never be surprised. Amazing how consistent this one idea is towards revealing the truth.

    People don’t believe this because ALL of us relate to others by thinking that they have the same thinking patterns as we do. We even do this with Animals.

    All of the Jews ancient writings are nothing more than a manual for psychopaths to live by. The Talmud is nothing but one psychopathic thought after another. The Talmud “great enlightenment” basically says that everyone not Jewish is there to serve Jews. All their property is really the Jews. No one is really human unless they’re Jews and their lives don’t matter.

    Jews have the same pattern over and over because it works. They go to another country. They say the last country oppressed them and they’ve always been oppressed because they love God and only serve him.

    They rise to the top of the country by these methods. They flatter the people who control the country, get them in their debt. Possibly black mail them. They take control of the information and media of the country. After this point the country goes down rapidly. Here’s where the psychopaths always mess up. They have no off switch. Have you ever watched a documentary on wolverines? They are just like wolverines. Wolverines are insatiable eaters. They will eat til they pass out. The Jews are they same. Anyone can get rich if all they do is pursue wealth constantly. This obsession is worse for the Jews as there is nothing they will not do. Psychopaths have no shame so they will do any crime or break any taboo to get money and power. Psychopaths think that the rest of are stupid and we deserve to get taken for being idiots. It’s not really a crime to con people because victims deserve what they get.

    Psychopaths having no empathy themselves can only go by the feedback they get from the people they are exploiting. So they push and push to see what they can get away with. The normal people build up resentment towards them. Thinking “surely they will reform or repent” like a normal person who does wrong. Of course the Jews do not. They don’t have the mental process for reform. Then in a huge mass outpouring of hate for the Jews, fed up with the refusal to reform their behavior, they attack and/or deport them. In this stage of the cycle the Big/Rich Jews escape and the little Jews are attacked.

    Start over.

    Jews are always telling us they are not like us. I believe them. Maybe I’m wrong but you will find great coherence if you think of the Jews as a tribe of psychopaths and you will never be surprised.

    • jim says:

      Societies have been destroyed by psychopaths. An example is Alcibiades. Alcibiades went from city to city in the ancient world. In Sparta he was more Spartan than the Spartans. Changing his chameleon skin every time he moved somewhere else and betraying everyone he came in contact with. Alcibiades killed Athens with risky schemes to glorify himself.

      Alcibiades did not betray Athens until Athens betrayed him – a very grave error on the part of the Athenians.

      • Sam says:

        “…Alcibiades did not betray Athens until Athens betrayed him…”

        You suggest he was not guilty of what they wished to try him for? So he should just go free…because. Sounds like our government now. He certainly screwed the wife of the King of Sparta when he was taken in by them. His life story suggest that he betrayed everyone he came in contact with.

        • jim says:

          He was quite obviously not guilty of what they wished to try him for, and the outcome of the trial was entirely predetermined.

          Loyalty has to go both ways.

    • Occupant says:

      >>The Jews are a tribe of psychopaths.

      Were Jews a tribe of psychopaths, murder rates among them would be higher. In fact, in every country for which we have evidence, crime rates among Jews are lower (see Richard Lynn’s ~The Chosen People~ for details.)

      http://www.amazon.com/Chosen-People-Jewish-Intelligence-Achievement/dp/1593680368/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1433540228&sr=8-1&keywords=richard+lynn

      • R. Jones says:

        You are missing the whole point of the post. There is a conditional and perhaps spurious connection between the positive attributes of psychopathy and it’s negative attributes. Generally “psychopaths” with stable childhoods are quite successful and don’t need to resort to crime, or perhaps only white collar crime.
        Jews are certainly more psychopathic than gentiles, I don’t think you can really argue with that. I think that if you correct for socioeconomic status and IQ then you would get a clearer picture of the crime rates of Jewish people.

        • jim says:

          Not seeing the positive traits of psychopathy among Jews. Jews are not calm under stress or danger. They are not good at making themselves liked and respected. Psychopathic social dominance is non verbal. Jews are mostly famous for being clever with words and infamous for twisting the meanings of words. So Jews make good lawyers. Psychopaths make good managers and salesmen.

          Not seeing the negative traits of psychopathy among Jews. Psychopaths are alarmingly efficient at killing people who get in their way. The murder rate among Jews is very low, and they are unwilling to do what it takes to deal with hostile elements within Israel.

          If there was a high rate of psychopathy in Israel, they would not have a Muslim problem inside Israel.

          • B says:

            >Jews are not calm under stress or danger.

            Hey, remember that time when the US had a terrorist attack and didn’t totally lose it’s shit? No? How about when it had a war on its hands and a quarter of the military aged male population mobilized and calmly did its duty, while a quarter of the country stayed calmly put under rocket attacks? Right.

        • Occupant says:

          >>Jews are certainly more psychopathic than gentiles

          Were Jews a pack of hyenas, Tel Aviv would look more like Detroit than Marseille.

    • B says:

      We’ll eat you and your little dog, too!

  13. 5371 says:

    This is a good post. However, the author does not seem to have noticed that ”leftism” is also not a natural kind.

  14. peppermint says:

    Ass burgers has also been called an anticoncept devised by the education-industrial complex to pathologize masculinity and womansplain away the authentic experience of men. But, it was ironically too normal for the cucks at Bolsheviks Broadcasting Corruption, so Sherlock isn’t a sperglord but a high-functioning sociopath.

  15. Zach says:

    Reading up on exactly what psychopathy is, I find to be very similar to a lot of psychology. Kind of “meh”.

    Behavior mapping onto the populace…

    • Zach says:

      I kinda feel bad. I kinda feel angry that I know everything. For example, why must I know this man is LITERALLY the foremost musical genius of our era?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7E34WFw4HE

      No, I still know everything. But I get a kick out of n00bs arguing about bullshit that really is arbitrary.

      (no, I hardly know anything btw)

    • Mark Citadel says:

      Psychology is almost 70% pseudoscience and conjecture. It is essentially astrology with a fancier and more expensive degree requirement.

  16. […] and civilization. The tinkered Canon (work in progress). Logic and absurdity. Anticoncepts. Economic pseudoscience. Awkward geezers. Genetic failure. Cat lady culture, and a dead […]

  17. […] and civilization. The tinkered Canon (work in progress). Logic and absurdity. Anticoncepts. Economic pseudoscience. Awkward geezers. Genetic failure. Cat lady culture, and a dead […]

  18. […] and civilization. The tinkered Canon (work in progress). Logic and absurdity.Anticoncepts. Economic pseudoscience. Awkward geezers. Genetic failure. Cat lady culture, and a dead nation’s […]

  19. […] an assist from Thumotic, Jim adds “Psychopathy” to the list of anti-concepts. Michael Laurel says, “With all due respect, not so […]

  20. […] concept of psychopathy makes you weak. Related: How to spot a psychopath. Related: Is psychopathy an anti-concept? Laurel says […]

  21. Tina says:

    Here is the concise explanation of psychopathy: http://www.wikihow.com/Spot-a-Pro-Social-Psychopath

Leave a Reply