On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:45:34 -0700, "L.W. \(Bill\) Hughes III"
<LWBillHughes@hughes.net> wrote:

PSYCHOPATHIC PERSONALITY

AN ENDEMIC SOCIAL DISEASE, A MASK OF SANITY

This introduction to "alien reaction machines" in human form describes
individuals with Anti-Social Personality Disorder (APD), Sociopaths,
and Psychopaths.

(In referring to these entities below, I use "that" instead of "who"
to reinforce the distinction between machine-like reactions and normal
human behavior.)

There is considerable overlap of symptoms as medical researchers have
refined the classifications. One of the links below provides detailed
distinctions among these definitions. It also includes an extensive
bibliography. In this essay, next, however, the older, generic term
"psychopath" is used.

A psychopath is a person who appears normal on the surface, until
he/she performs some outrageous criminal act. At that point it has
been customary to label the behavior as temporary "insanity", but that
is a legal term, not a medical one. The prison psychiatric hospital
environment greatly reduces the options for the new patient to make
the kind of independent decisions that caused the original trouble in
open society. In this controlled environment he/she appears normal,
shows no overt signs of psychosis, passes all probing tests with
flying colors, and is discharged as "cured". On the street again, more
crimes are committed, and the cycle repeats. Thus, these individuals
fall through the cracks between law and medicine.

Most people, including judges and juries, are still unable to make the
distinction that not all prison inmates are psychopaths and not all
antisocial individuals are convicted criminals. The links below can be
confusing unless one is aware that the label "psychopathic
personality" was the original descriptive term for today's aggressive
"antisocial personality". The new euphemism is an obfuscation of an
unpleasant truth about people we are forced to deal with on a daily
basis. It is difficult for all of us, especially when associating with
disruptive school children, whose unearned "self esteem" must be
protected at all costs. In the literature one can expect to see both
the new and the old terms, without much distinction between them.

Western industrial civilization has developed a complex set of rules
of behavior for its citizens. These rules have evolved from the need
for cooperative organization in order to produce the goods and
services actually needed by society for minimum survival as a group,
and also to produce the intangible benefits that make that survival
tolerable for the individual. It makes most sense to reserve the
greatest rewards to those individuals who produce the most goods and
services of the highest quality. Most people understand they need
specialized training for any role above some minimum level, and they
must compete for that training, and later compete on the job itself.
They understand that the need for group survival dictates the rules of
the game, and they must not disrupt the group process by
uncooperative, dishonest, unethical, or violent behavior, or flagrant
violation of the rules.

Psychopaths believe they are "entitled" to the lifestyle benefits of
Western Civilization that most people only hope for as a potential
reward for outstanding job performance, organizational loyalty, and
smooth cooperation with other members of a team. Psychopaths can't or
won't work at the high performance level that might logically provide
upscale benefits. At a lower level where they might be more qualified,
they feel that any menial, boring, dirty, or disgusting WORK is
"beneath" them. Thus, whether at a high level or low level, any
meaningful, honest "work" is a dirty word to a psychopath.

With extraordinary assistance from motivated parents, some more
intelligent, but still antisocial people can and do gravitate to
higher-paid management, politics, or the professions, where power and
prestige can be significant ego enhancers. However, they are always
"close to the edge" emotionally, and are likely to abuse sex, drugs,
and alcohol. Also, they may tend to "seek out" excuses to deliberately
over-indulge, in order to remove temporarily the stifling "mask of
sanity" that never quite fits. Then, when "under the influence" they
are more likely to exhibit aggressive, violent, and/or bizarre
behavior in inappropriate public places. This odd behavior is the key
classic sign of acute dysfunction. Some reference books provide
fascinating case histories describing typical incidents.

When one realizes that the antisocial syndrome is pervasive in today's
society, what protection is available to the average adult citizen?
How can one know the alien body snatcher before any actual overt
criminal act? There are two simple test tools available to any
perceptive, educated adult: The tools are contrived casual
conversation and unobtrusive observation. With these tools one can
make a simple first screening test to possibly rule out psychopathic
personality in public officials or others:

The psychopath is a dangerously clever "alien reaction machine" that
has practiced giving all the correct answers. However, much of that
verbal practice will have taken place in institutions or in
dysfunctional families in lower-class neighborhoods. When those same
answers are given in upscale surroundings, they come out as contrived
falsehoods.

Another clue is that the alien machine will not take responsibility,
but will tend to "blame others" for misfortunes with drugs, sexual
partners, bosses, co- workers, authorities, or whatever. Also, the
full-blown psychopath is NEVER altruistic or ethical (except by
accident), but may be shrewd enough to pretend altruism as sham
behavior (to attract votes). By accepting a psychopath's statements at
face value, without cross- checking public records or other sources, a
careless or inattentive interviewer can fail to pick up on the
frequent lies. For example, to trip up corrupt politicians or
self-described "experts", sometimes it is only necessary to compare
two different answers to the same or similar questions repeated on two
or more different occasions, without involving external sources at
all. Any pattern of lies will stand out as outside the norm of ethical
conduct. By itself, this discrepancy is insufficient to classify the
individual as antisocial, but it is an indication that other tests
should be made.
* * * * *