But then I've been suggesting that many Millennials are psychopaths for years. It's like the defining characteristic of that generation. Isn't that sad?
Are these people truly psychopaths, or are they acting a role? If they are true psychopaths, and people suffering from this condition are known to be uncurable, why should we allow them in college?
Because psychopaths almost never show up in a psychologist's office to be diagnosed; almost the only ones that ever get diagnosed are in the criminal justice system. (Their victims show up very often in a therapist's office, of course.) So we can't keep them out "for being psychopaths", because we don't know who they are. Once they've exhibited psychopathic behaviour that violates academic rules, they can be booted out for that, of course.
I understand we can't keep people out for their psychopathy, but what if these "psychopathic students" MPE wrote about were just playing a role they thought they had to play? I'll give you an example: when I was going to a college in the Northeast*, most of the freshmen were frantic about getting drunk and would do anything to get plastered on the weekends. Why? Because they were trying to live up to some "college experiance" which was closer to "Animal House" than what actually goes on at the average college. There may be psychopaths in the universtites, but there may also be people who are acting this way because they're convinced something is inherently wrong with them or they're just bored with themselves or their situation so they act out.
________________________________________
* Yes, this is the Northeasten Ghetto Tech I've mentioned before. I don't name the college to conform with the "fictional names" policy of this site.
By "playing a role," do you mean that, perhaps people learn behavior?
Uh, yeah, I do adhere to that paradigm; I have been trained in sociology and anthropology, so I find merit in that philosophical point of view. If we're actually debating Mind vs. Society, I'll bet on Society winning every time.
I do not believe that most people "choose" their behaviors on their own. It takes a great deal of will and effort to change one's behavior, and, quite frankly, most of us lack the self-awareness and force of will to do so without a great deal of motivation. Experiencing negative consequences for antisocial behavior can provide that motivation.
That leads to the question:
Are diagnosed psychopaths born that way or are they created by their environment?
Will we ever know that answer? It's Nature vs. Nurture, the ongoing debate. My personal response would be a little of column A combined with a little of Column B, much as people suffering depression may experience it all their lives while others have a "breaking point" that seems to provoke the disorder.
But, yes, I do believe that if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, then we have to assume it's a duck unless someone else has a viable alternative answer.
So, yeah, if you were a drunken whore in college because of a movie, then your ass should have been kicked out until you found a way to alter your behavior if it interfered with your life (or that of others). Or whatever.
P.S. Drunks aren't psychopaths, but I will accept your analogy on face value only because you're trying to guess about people's motivations (which never quite works out right) and all most of us should care about is the behavior we have observed and whether it is a problem. Leave intent to their therapists to uncover.
Thus back to Merely Academic's suggestion that there might be many more psychopaths among the population because the ones we count are the ones incarcerated. Think about some of the nutball loonies we discuss here on CM...some of them fit the definition of a psychopath too, and they will probably never end up in jail.
For those interested, Wikipedia seems to have a good list of traits of a potential psychopath:
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think I subconsciously remarked on this very phenomenon a few months back!
ReplyDeleteBut then I've been suggesting that many Millennials are psychopaths for years. It's like the defining characteristic of that generation. Isn't that sad?
Ugh. Why am I not surprised?
ReplyDelete@ Meanest Professor Ever
ReplyDeleteAre these people truly psychopaths, or are they acting a role? If they are true psychopaths, and people suffering from this condition are known to be uncurable, why should we allow them in college?
Because psychopaths almost never show up in a psychologist's office to be diagnosed; almost the only ones that ever get diagnosed are in the criminal justice system. (Their victims show up very often in a therapist's office, of course.) So we can't keep them out "for being psychopaths", because we don't know who they are.
ReplyDeleteOnce they've exhibited psychopathic behaviour that violates academic rules, they can be booted out for that, of course.
I understand we can't keep people out for their psychopathy, but what if these "psychopathic students" MPE wrote about were just playing a role they thought they had to play? I'll give you an example: when I was going to a college in the Northeast*, most of the freshmen were frantic about getting drunk and would do anything to get plastered on the weekends. Why? Because they were trying to live up to some "college experiance" which was closer to "Animal House" than what actually goes on at the average college. There may be psychopaths in the universtites, but there may also be people who are acting this way because they're convinced something is inherently wrong with them or they're just bored with themselves or their situation so they act out.
ReplyDelete________________________________________
* Yes, this is the Northeasten Ghetto Tech I've mentioned before. I don't name the college to conform with the "fictional names" policy of this site.
Strelnikov,
ReplyDeleteBy "playing a role," do you mean that, perhaps people learn behavior?
Uh, yeah, I do adhere to that paradigm; I have been trained in sociology and anthropology, so I find merit in that philosophical point of view. If we're actually debating Mind vs. Society, I'll bet on Society winning every time.
I do not believe that most people "choose" their behaviors on their own. It takes a great deal of will and effort to change one's behavior, and, quite frankly, most of us lack the self-awareness and force of will to do so without a great deal of motivation. Experiencing negative consequences for antisocial behavior can provide that motivation.
That leads to the question:
Are diagnosed psychopaths born that way or are they created by their environment?
Will we ever know that answer? It's Nature vs. Nurture, the ongoing debate. My personal response would be a little of column A combined with a little of Column B, much as people suffering depression may experience it all their lives while others have a "breaking point" that seems to provoke the disorder.
But, yes, I do believe that if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, then we have to assume it's a duck unless someone else has a viable alternative answer.
So, yeah, if you were a drunken whore in college because of a movie, then your ass should have been kicked out until you found a way to alter your behavior if it interfered with your life (or that of others). Or whatever.
P.S. Drunks aren't psychopaths, but I will accept your analogy on face value only because you're trying to guess about people's motivations (which never quite works out right) and all most of us should care about is the behavior we have observed and whether it is a problem. Leave intent to their therapists to uncover.
Thus back to Merely Academic's suggestion that there might be many more psychopaths among the population because the ones we count are the ones incarcerated. Think about some of the nutball loonies we discuss here on CM...some of them fit the definition of a psychopath too, and they will probably never end up in jail.
For those interested, Wikipedia seems to have a good list of traits of a potential psychopath:
The following findings are for research purposes only, and are not used in clinical diagnosis. These items cover the affective, interpersonal, and behavioral features. ...
Factor 1
Aggressive narcissism
1. Glibness/superficial charm
2. Grandiose sense of self-worth
3. Pathological lying
4. Cunning/manipulative
5. Lack of remorse or guilt
6. Emotionally shallow
7. Callous/lack of empathy
8. Failure to accept responsibility for own actions
Factor 2
Socially deviant lifestyle
1. Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
2. Parasitic lifestyle
3. Poor behavioral control
4. Promiscuous sexual behavior
5. Lack of realistic, long-term goals
6. Impulsiveness
7. Irresponsibility
8. Juvenile delinquency
9. Early behavioral problems
10. Revocation of conditional release
Traits not correlated with either factor
1. Many short-term marital relationships
2. Criminal versatility