Category Archives: violence

Kohlberg, psychopaths, and the pointless tragedy of Socrates

Socrates

The problem with most of our modern social models is they assume that humanity is exactly one global set of behavioural variations.  This makes sense as actionable study of psychopaths has really started in the early 70s.  Without a concerted effort until the 1990s.  Psychopathy as completely different set of social behaviour is only 40 years old, and it’s most definitive test, the MRI word list, only 30.

Lawrence Kohlberg developed a theory of moral development.  Of course his development model assumes all humans could display all behaviours but this is not true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development

It turns out only the first four stages of moral development are available to psychopaths.  The highest a human with only a master/slave model of interaction is a level four (of six) or the law and order model of society.  Level 5 is almost a literal definition of applied empathy, and level six is expanding empathy beyond the current physical and temporal constraints into a system of higher principals.  No empathy IS the definition of a psychopath.

For simplicities sake, I’m working on the principal the proceeding stages are automatically available (they seem to be) when a higher stage is accomplished.  Theoretically psychopaths could accept that society is their master and they the slave, IF they accept that all the empaths working together are superior to their self in every way, AND that is unlikely to change.  Without screening it is impossible to guarantee a psychopath will never perceive a golden opportunity rapidly plunging them back into a two or a one (what’s in it for me.) on Kohlberg’s scale.  So for now it seems they are reduced to the highest possible consistent state of a three, assuming that they have accepted a ‘social norm’ that many people would take a golden opportunity.  Unfortunately this is true enough in a society where their imperceptibility is the norm.

I have long contended that no society could be peaceful unless their entire membership is at least a four or law and order oriented.  Then post conventional agents could adjust the laws as needed, and the society could adapt to their environment without conflict.

When Socrates was threatened with death he contented that law and order were the minimal requirements for a peaceful civilization.  Without the aid of Kohlberg’s stages I think he was describing a level four citizen as a societies minimal requirement for progress and peace.  What Socrates didn’t know is that (absent genetic screening) that a percentage of indistinguishable humans could never become a stage four in moral development.  So long as some high functioning humans can’t get past a three, there can never really be peace.

I understand Socrates decision at both a gut and an intellectual level, but he didn’t have all the information.  He didn’t know that some people could never ever be reliable fours, and could never truly revere law and order, no matter how intelligent or logical they became.  That they just didn’t have a conscience, and we just couldn’t spot them every time.  If he did he would have realized that the social contract had always been invalid, because some of it’s signers traded a property they could not have ever owned.  The capacity for complete reliability.  He would have ran.  He would have raised and army, and he would have crushed the disintegrating country that condemned him.

What a tragic waste.

Stuxnet reaching far beyond targets

real-mutants

If you don’t know Stuxnet is a militarized virus designed specifically to destroy Iranian nuclear targets.  Turns out it isn’t as discriminating as originally thought.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/11/america-and-israel-created-a-monster-computer-virus-which-now-threatens-nuclear-reactors-worldwide.html

Of course Stuxnet did it’s job, delaying Iranians nuclear program.  A success.  Why hasn’t it since stopped?

First the botched GE/Fukushima plant design failing, then the government shutting the nuclear watchdogs, now this.

How sane is a society that builds a weapon which can cause multiple nuclear accidents, and doesn’t install an off switch?  When will we take nuclear power seriously?  Radioactive heavy metals don’t care that they make you sad, or dead.  It’s not like nuclear weapons who’s fallout fades in months.  Once it’s out, it’s out.  Killing life in the oceans, air, and soil for tens of thousands of years.

Dr. Brunner warrior gene, NOT the psychopath gene.

)

Great video from National Geographic.  A little slow, but a fun watch.  Talks about Dr. Brunner’s discovery of the MAO-A gene.  The gene actually works like a Serotonin mop.  Sucking it out of the system after it has sent it’s signal.  The shortened MAO-A gene doesn’t function normally and fails to absorb serotonin.  It only happens in the X chromosome, so women don’t seem to be effected.  They are protected by the second chromosome.

The video was smart to point out that the gene indicates a propensity for violence, not a guarantee.  It’s pretty clear that it was misnamed.  It’s not really ‘the warrior gene’ more like the ‘aggression’ or the ‘fly off the handle’ gene.  Brings up a good question.  Is the first degree murder harder to prove for a person with a ‘fly off the handle gene?’   Yes in my opinion it is.   This is a double edged sword though.  It should ALSO be harder to get early parole.  Good behavior mean less about your future when you can’t fully control your behavior.  Change the environment and bang.  This isn’t just conjecture, this is exactly how ‘the Hare’ works against psychopaths at parole hearings.

Great job National Geographic.  Warrior gene as the cause of psychopathy?  Totally busted.  Straight up behaviorism, also busted.  Not only that but providing hard facts that a behavior’s likelihood can be genetic.

I want to bring up something the video spelled out so I can point to it later.  The short MAOA gene does the same thing that prescription SSRIs do.  SSRI stands for Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor.  It does just what it sounds like.  It forces natural Serotonin to stay in the system.  The exact same thing the ‘Warrior Gene’ defect does.  But does it have the same effect on behavior as the warrior gene you wonder?  Yes, considering most of the recent mass shootings have been committed by people taking SSRIs!  I’d love for someone to prove me wrong, but it looks to me like prescribing SSRIs is a terrible idea.  It’s like turning on the warrior gene!

Boy Scouts and the Catholic Church – a review of two child protection training programs

Multi Colored Lollipop Candy

I have recently been required to attend two training programs as a parent wanting to be involved in my child’s activities.   Once is the “Youth Protection Training” offered online by the BSA or Boy Scouts of America.  The other is the “Protecting God’s Children for Adults” program offered by Virtus, and organization representing the Catholic Church.

First both programs are available to take for the general public.  Signup is online.  I’m not sure if what their policy states, but practically all you have to do is first sign up online, and login for the BSA or show up for Virtus.

https://myscouting.scouting.org

http://www.virtus.org/virtus/

I am not going to review every detail of the programs nor should I.  If you want to know all about them, just sign up and participate yourself.

The BSA

First I want to say the BSA has really thought about how security and trust works here.  Major kudos for their adult ‘buddy’ system.  No child is to be alone with any adult but their own parent, ever.  Anyone who has worked in security long enough knows that access means suspicion and liability.  Preventing children from ever being alone with a single adult as a policy makes sense.  This is new from when I was a child and a major change, for the better.

The lack of a physical class is not ideal, but understandable.  The problem with online classes is the video is carefully vetted.  This is good for not glossing over important points, but poor for connecting with people.  The BSAs approach is relying more on carefully thought out rules, teaching them and sticking to that.  It’s all about controlling physical access to the kids.  Partly though adult pairing and partly through restricting isolated areas.

One excellent idea was the immediate confiscation of electronic devices the second they are used to take a picture of restricted areas or behaviors.  This is sensible since MOST devices can communicate somehow, and once a picture or video gets out there will be no controlling it.

The regular gammit of being wary of touching, internet friends, privacy during bathroom activities, etc. They did well on general violence vs molestation as well.  Hazing and bullying gets a good amount of attention, including the perils of letting junior leaders make independent decisions without supervision.  They made the differentiation that children can also molest other children though all the video sequences depicted adult actors.

I should mention that the written texts are even better, and more detailed than the video training, but less likely to be read in full by parents.

Virtus

Completely different experience than the BSA training.  They went right for the empathy to gets parents attention and it works!  Major kudos for the video strategy.  Instead of getting actors to depict (and interpret) child molesters, the actor and interviewees in the video are actual child molesters.  This is useful both to parents who are less experienced with their children’s security and people who further study immoral acts.  Less experienced parents get to see just how normal the deviants act is (even while casually discussing some serious perversion), and folks more in the know get to look for subtle ques that could amount to future tip offs.

For example I am fairly sure that the first molester, Ronnie, is a psychopath.  He is very cold and callous to his acts, even while displaying warm conversational social ques.  He has adopted some clinical and police lingo when discussing his own acts.   He started molesting when he was ten years old.  And the biggest tip, he displayed some rapid shifting between scripts at the end of the first video.  Not just stuttering words, but stuttering ideas.  Somebody give that man the Hare.

As a note using the videos of actual child molesters can backfire in the future.   Anger was brewing, leaving people open to manipulation.  After the training I pointed out to the man in front of me his veins were popping out of his arms and he looked as if he would rip his metal folding chair in half.  Though I saw NO evidence of marketing or propaganda techniques during the training, such techniques could be used in the future.  Overall I would say the benefits outweigh the risk.  People have been in the dark long enough.

Another major surprise was the Deacon who lead he discussion between conversations.  Among his qualifications, he is an ex LEO (law enforcement officer), was friends with a priest molester who he later investigated and busted, and has had several close interactions with child abuse cases, including near misses with his own children.  I seriously doubt all the Virtus leaders are this involved and pertinent, but it’s a very good sign he the one performing the training at that church.

The Virtus curriculum was reasonably secular.  It was surprisingly technological with some good suggestions like disabling the internet for latch key kids, and criticism of social networking (like Facebook.)  Did a fair amount on the dangers of casual touching opening a door to normalcy.

In contrast to the physical access controls of the scouts, there were no hard and fast rules about privacy.  While it was ‘to be avoided’, it’s not clear what the church is doing to limit access.   The scouting policy had a sensible policy here for private conversations to be had out of earshot, but in sight.  This also opens the door to hazing, bullying and possibly even molestation from other children.

Psychology

The lack of psychological discussion was disappointing.  It seems to me that child molesters are one of two categories.  Psychopaths who see all interactions in terms of masters and slaves.  Molesting psychopaths may have molested as children which they accepted as dutiful slaves.  Of course when they became an adult and the master, they expect the same privilege in return.  In addition, psychopaths may have simply been presented with what they perceived to be a ‘golden opportunity’ and decided to molest because they thought it would be fun and they could not be caught.  Empathic children who’s metaminds were incomplete or had blank slates when they were molested, may also become molesters.  Repeated molestation added ‘sex with children’ to their consciences groups of normal ‘moral’ behavior.    Again kudos to Virtus for drilling that home.  In any of the three cases, molesters really think or feel their behavior is normal.  They will not betray their intentions.

Psychology is important because it reveals the greatest risk.  A psychopath with no past history of receiving or giving abuse, and no perceptible grooming behavior may perceive a golden opportunity to sexually abuse a child, and take it.   An intelligent psychopath in the sociopath stage can show NO signs of being a psychopath at all!  It can come out of the blue!  The key to successful child protection is preventing golden opportunities with your child and ANY adult or child.

Now it is possible, most likely through collusion for two emapths who have normalized child molestation to work together inside the BSA.  But they have disadvantages to psychopaths in subterfuge.  They are subject to the kind heartstring tugging that Virtus practices in it’s training.   While their emotional selves are twisted up, they still operate like any emotional people with their numerous weaknesses and tells.  This is well documented elsewhere by conventional psychology.

Ratings

So together both programs make an excellent child protection program.  Virtus has superior discussion of detecting empathic child molesters, while the BSA has the best policy for preventing golden opportunities.

The Catholic Church (Virtus) gets three stars for superior rhetoric appealing and dedicated to detecting empathic molesters, but failure to control physical access.  This is probably a symptom of a culture in which all people are redeemable.  This is at odds with the evidence of how psychopaths think.   Psychopaths are oblivious to long term risk like punishment from God in the afterlife (assuming they actually capable of true faith in God, which is highly unlikely.)

The BSA gets five stars for dealing with all scenarios.  While psychopaths can never really trust each other, two or more empathic molesters could come up with a pact to exploit the loophole.   Problem is at least one of the adults must be a scout leader, who are subject to background checks.  While not perfect, this is a best effort, and I do not know of a better system at this time.

 

Multiple personality disorder and psychopaths

masks

When a person is suffering from Multiple Personality Disorder or formally known as Dissociative Identity Disorder (aka:DID) the attributes of their personalities may vary in interactivity with other personalities, and frequency that a particular personality is active.  Some DIDs experience the appearance of new personalities, particularly under stress.  This brings up an interesting question.  Is there a risk that a DID can spontaneously spawn a personality that is a psychopath?

In a model where a particular physical part of the brain is associated with the conscience the answer is definitively yes.  A new personality that was physically isolated from lets say the amygdala, and previous personalities, would not be able to form empathy.  If their isolation did not change that personality could stay a psychopath indefinitely.

While data is spotty, it seems to me if the conscience were an isolated organ of the brain, there would be many more crimes committed by newly split multiple personalities.  Usually personalities share knowledge, and take up specific areas of the brain as identified by MRI.  If this were the case why wouldn’t a psychopathic personality, isolated from key parts of the brain, form every time a DID first fractured?  If a psychopathic personally formed nearly every time or even sometimes, wouldn’t it immediately seek retribution against those who harmed it?

In the metamind model behaviour is more consistent with early DID behaviour.  First the bad news.  All empaths are born as effective psychopaths as infants and their metamind is fully active by the time they are about 7 years old.  So a brand new personality could ethically be an infant and effectively a psychopath.  The new personality would likely speak very simply if at all and be very physically oriented.

The good news is, they would also be a narcissist and very inward looking, if not threatened or otherwise goaded into confrontation with the outside world.  This would improve over time as their isolated metamind collected emotional data.  If enough time passed for the new personality in a safe environment, it could be as conscionable as any other empath.  A safe environment may not be possible or likely though, as the new personality may only appear under stressful conditions.

If you are a DID and are going to attempt to reach a new, isolated, possibly psychopathic personality, you should try to reach them with a passive gentle minded personality, not an aggressive one.  Narcissists isolate themselves intentionally for protection from a world they don’t understand, and reaching them with an aggressive approach will garner an aggressive life or death response, known as narcissist rage.

Please if you are suffering from DID seek a therapist who specialises in DID cases, especially if you think an isolated personality may be psychopathic!

The Rose/Manson Interview

Now for something a little more down to earth.

This is a great video to grasp the basics of psychopathy.  Manson clearly lands in the ASPD stage.  This includes Narcissistic elements of course.  Looks like he never resolved himself to the long game of sociopathy.  He is not aware and apparently not interested that Rose is not falling for his emotional trigger saturated scripts.  He is clearly very intelligent as the smarter the psychopath the more effective the scripts.  Not that it matters for him at this point, facing life in prision give little motivation to cover up who he is.

It’s not surprising if you find this video difficult to watch.  Beside ethical indignation at his acts, he is very, very good at lighting off emotional triggers.  He is actually trying to program the other viewers, Rose, and you as you watch.  If you didn’t notice you are likely very vulnerable to both marketing and propaganda.  Your metamind, probably felt in your gut, should be screaming!  It is critical that you understand and recognise that technique if you ever expect to know yourself.

If you’ve seen inception, your metamind should feel something like this.

intruder

You’ll only get to experience clear first hand sight of these scripts if you improve your technique enough that a psychopath is forced to switch scripts several times.  This is what Manson is doing throughout with Rose.  Constantly changing the topic so he can use his whole salvo of emotionally charged words to try and implant new ideas in your or Rose’s head.

If you were to transcribe and then rewrite Mansons words with less common synonyms, you would notice a few things.

While the scripts are coherent to themselves, the larger thread they follow is almost totally incoherent.  He is clearly just pulling the next script out of the ‘comfey’ or ‘scared’ or ‘remorseful’ pile, depending on what he wants you to feel.   Of course a sociopath who is successfully integrated into the corporate world (for example) will have much longer much more complex scripts.

In a more abstract sense the rambling choice of scripts is a commentary on the empathic mind.  He so much as says so.  He is pointing out how irrational we are, and how we made ourselves vulnerable to people like him.  He clearly is not aware of others in this sense.  That’s why he isn’t a sociopath.  He has no idea we have a metamind that specializes in connecting unlike things by compound emotion.  From his perspective the origin of empathic ideas is totally opaque.  Just a random number generator.

This video in part is the inspiration for the metamind model.  We could sit there all day and attach meanings to his ramblings, he’s counting on that, but his assortment of scripts are are what they are to him.  Just buckets full of scripts.  His lone insight through his sole lens is that we are insane from his perspective.

Self diagnosed scientist sociopath

Assuming science is working as it should, not a bad field for a psychopath to go into.   No singular power over data.  Or is there?  Scientists need repeatable predictions to make real headway in science.  If they cheat, they may unload some grant cash from the NIH, but eventually the lies will be caught when someone else tries the experiment.

Sorry doc, but I’ll take a meta-psychopath as a surgeon over a sociopath any day.   Just don’t have that kind of faith in the malpractice insurance market to keep him on the straight and narrow.

A hope here for a guild of psychopaths who have dedicated themselves to logic.  But don’t want to be naive, juries still out on that one.  Clearly one of the better outcomes for an intelligent psychopath, full self awareness as an advanced sociopath.

He talks about multiple warrior genes, and points out that he has them.  Might seem like some anecdotal proof.  Of course the warrior genes could indicate if someone is also a psychopath that they are more likely to get stuck in the psychopathic subconscious ASPD/ego stage.   Which likely means jail.  Which is by far the largest group of psychopaths physiologically analyzed.  Not the greatest sole pool to pull data from, or to come to sociological conclusions from either.

Good video.  Bring you thinking cap.

Thanks!  More videos please.

Video – psychopath in the family


Not bad some flaws and some good ideas.  Commentary follows.

First I need to laugh at the psychopath admirer.  Needs to know himself better.  He could do all those things.  All the psychopaths he describes do not need imagination or even manners.  Doctors can be complete bastards and still be successful performance oriented surgeons, and so can judges and lawyers, and still be rewarded handsomely.  But SHOULD they be allowed?  Society relies on the doctor and judge to exercise SOLE good moral judgement.  They can do lots of harm before they are finally caught and stopped.  He needs to question the society he chooses to be part of that pushes him to be successful at that high a cost.

At 9:05 Mark Dadds points out psychopathy is genetic.  “More genetic?”  ASPD stage may not be genetic, but psychopathy is!  This is where wants/abilities/limits conscience model can really help.  The limitation was there at birth, but the behavior can be quite different.  This is both the psychopaths other genetics (intelligence,aptitudes,etc) and the nurture part of their upbringing.  I expect they will be similar to other children at a very young age.  You can’t change their behavior without brutalizing them, instead change their whole context.  A variation on shunning.  Impose an external conscience to shape the logical mind.  So it does seem like he’s on the right track.

Of course there is always some moral danger labeling children.  Children enter world as effective psychopaths, then start picking up components of empathy.  Don’t want to mix up psychopathic kids with slow emotional learners.  Where psychopaths need logical structure, empathic children need room to make the (hopefully minor) mistakes that help their metamind grow.

Dadds mentioned training psychopaths to be better manipulator, calling it “Folklore.”  I would say at least ‘serious risk’ is called for here.  It’s hard fact psychopaths get worse with conventional therapy (and no other remediation.)  They struggle with trying to talk to a different species, us.  They soak up the information about the conventional psychological maps offered up to them.  Premeditated abuse will vary, but they have a legitimate need to know how we work.  At first just to survive as a slave.  The big risk coming when they decide they are master.

It is mentioned they are reward driven.  This is an important point and the only system recognized by the master/slave model.  If they can’t step out of the pattern only choice is a rewards trap.

I am glad they pointed out a few misconceptions.  Psychopaths are not always violent, in fact they usually aren’t.  Kudos for defending the autism spectrum.  People suffering from Aspergers syndrome might seem cold at a glance, but they are not emotionally deficient.  They have a conscience, they simply have trouble expressing or receiving emotion.

Love to hear more detail on the Amygdala theory out there.  I’ll dig around.

Thanks for the video.  Keep them coming!