How Psychopathic Are You?

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Post your score

30%

It tells me to watch out for those who might take advantage of me.

 

[Thalassa]

"Secondary Psychopathy" sounds like something that a psychopathic APA doctor who enjoys breaking the Nuremberg Code and micromanaging society would come up with to explain people who don't do or believe everything he says...

After the A.P.A. actually altered its bylaws to allow psychologists to assist the government in the torture of people - I stopped giving them much of any credibility whatsoever.

Also, they don't consider "Sadistic Personality Disorder" (enjoying inflicting pain and controlling people) a disorder, but they consider any resistance to any authority or control "antisocial."

Secondary psychopathy is only embraced by some theorists and psychopathy is a legal term, not in the DSM as AphroditeGoneAwry pointed out. Secondary psychopathy has apparently been around as a terminology since about the 1940s, and still describes a criminal who consistently harms others despite ability to feel fear or anxiety, they prefer the rush of doing criminal activity, and never learned to distinguish good actions from bad actions. The secondary psychopath is actually a creepy person. While not entirely devoid of empathy, he or she can turn empathy on and off at will. Psychopaths who can feel empathy are actually more revolting in a way, because they understand that the victim feels pain and just.dont.care.

That's why I did not like the way one person worded it as lack of regard for social behavior, because it seems like you interpreted it as hippie pot smokers being called secondary psychopaths, which is absurd.

 

[Thalassa]

They didn't just participate, they altered their bylaws for that explicit purpose. Dr. Paul McHugh, former dean of Psychiatry at John Hopkins, has taken issue with the credibility of a lot of disorders the APA has been putting out, suggesting they're straying into the territory of social engineering rather than helping sick people, in so many words. I believe him to some extent on that account - especially given their apparent belief that sadistic behavior is actually not a disorder.

The APA has assisted in numerous government experiments and projects which violated the Nuremberg code over the past decades - I trust them about as much as I trust the USSR's psychological establishment.

Ahhh... from what I understand they just wanted to make histrionic and narcissism sub categories of bpd, because narcissistic rage is similar to bpd rage and histrionics need a lot of attention and approval though they don't have the intense fear of abandonment. While some "disorders" are probably exaggerated because they are more result of unnatural lifestyle (lack of exercise, artificial light, too much sitting, traffic, isolation and stress of modern life) the fact remains that these people need help, society is just starting to change its attitude as to why. Like Ritalin prescription. While some children really need it, many who have been given it probably just would do better on a farm than in public schools, or just need their sugar taken away and more exercise and less tv. There is definitely such a thing as placing too much trust in the establishment or authority figures, but alas when people make blanket statements like you are making, more likely it results in homeless schizophrenics who won't take their medication. The APA serves a purpose, they just need to be questioned, and they have been and they do change considerably. Homosexuality used to be considered a disorder, and now people can live relatively normal lives without the extensive institutionalization many endured sixty years ago, now only severe cases are kept in hospitals longer than a few days to a few weeks.

 

[blahblahbob]

Ahhh... from what I understand they just wanted to make histrionic and narcissism sub categories of bpd, because narcissistic rage is similar to bpd rage and histrionics need a lot of attention and approval though they don't have the intense fear of abandonment. While some "disorders" are probably exaggerated because they are more result of unnatural lifestyle (lack of exercise, artificial light, too much sitting, traffic, isolation and stress of modern life) the fact remains that these people need help, society is just starting to change its attitude as to why. Like Ritalin prescription. While some children really need it, many who have been given it probably just would do better on a farm than in public schools, or just need their sugar taken away and more exercise and less tv. There is definitely such a thing as placing too much trust in the establishment or authority figures, but alas when people make blanket statements like you are making, more likely it results in homeless schizophrenics who won't take their medication. The APA serves a purpose, they just need to be questioned, and they have been and they do change considerably. Homosexuality used to be considered a disorder, and now people can live relatively normal lives without the extensive institutionalization many endured sixty years ago, now only severe cases are kept in hospitals longer than a few days to a few weeks.

Everything in the DSM revolves around proper employment/citizenship and little around interpersonal relationships - they're social engineers - not people interested in human nature.

 

[prplchknz]

How did people get lower scores than me? I think they're lying to the test or themselves. I answered honestly but I don't know what I said

 

[blahblahbob]

Ahhh... from what I understand they just wanted to make histrionic and narcissism sub categories of bpd, because narcissistic rage is similar to bpd rage and histrionics need a lot of attention and approval though they don't have the intense fear of abandonment. While some "disorders" are probably exaggerated because they are more result of unnatural lifestyle (lack of exercise, artificial light, too much sitting, traffic, isolation and stress of modern life) the fact remains that these people need help, society is just starting to change its attitude as to why. Like Ritalin prescription. While some children really need it, many who have been given it probably just would do better on a farm than in public schools, or just need their sugar taken away and more exercise and less tv. There is definitely such a thing as placing too much trust in the establishment or authority figures, but alas when people make blanket statements like you are making, more likely it results in homeless schizophrenics who won't take their medication. The APA serves a purpose, they just need to be questioned, and they have been and they do change considerably. Homosexuality used to be considered a disorder, and now people can live relatively normal lives without the extensive institutionalization many endured sixty years ago, now only severe cases are kept in hospitals longer than a few days to a few weeks.

Here's "chubbers" result from the psychopath test... notice it doesn't call him a scumbag for being a psychopath, but praises him for it - that about embodies everything wrong with contemporary Psych academia.

Note this test is supposedly developed by a psychology professor at Oxford.

If that makes me angry, I'm borderline. If I refuse to recognize the authority of psychopaths, I've got antisocial tendencies. If I think I'm a better person than them because I don't like torturing animals or people, I'm a narcissist.

 

[Thalassa]

Here's "chubbers" result from the psychopath test... notice it doesn't call him a scumbag for being a psychopath, but praises him for it - that about embodies everything wrong with contemporary Psych academia.

Note this test is supposedly developed by a psychology professor at Oxford.

If that makes me angry, I'm borderline. If I refuse to recognize the authority of psychopaths, I've got antisocial tendencies. If I think I'm a better person than them because I don't like torturing animals or people, I'm a narcissist.

No actually, no. Many academics believe that there is no positive side to psychopathy, and if you had watched the documentary, they said one of the best ways to deal with a narcissist or psychopath is actually not to alarm or anger them further by allowing them to save face. That keeps them from acting out, like most people, really, but especially with a person who doesn't feel shame, shaming them isn't effective. Which is why I think they should be sentenced automatically to the death penalty when they are remorseless and have committed especially heinous crimes. Is an Oxford professor supposed to tell random strangers on the internet they're scum bags? While you and I can do that, he surely isn't allowed to speak that way in a professional capacity.

Yes, some people, especially insecure beta males, have an unhealthy admiration of psychopaths, because they think they're strong or powerful. But as I already mentioned, successful and corporate psychopaths typically come from priveleged backgrounds, they are not necessarily "self made" likely due to their inability to adjust to the feelings or needs of others, and the way they cause strife through manipulation.

I don't like that attitude either, it's very wrong, there's nothing to admire about people who are basically brute vikings who rape and pillage with little concience.

 

[Thalassa]

Everything in the DSM revolves around proper employment/citizenship and little around interpersonal relationships - they're social engineers - not people interested in human nature.

Actually that's not true.

 

[Thalassa]

How did people get lower scores than me? I think they're lying to the test or themselves. I answered honestly but I don't know what I said

Why? Do you think you are more empathetic than other people? Why couldn't someone have a score lower than yours?

 

[blahblahbob]

Is an Oxford professor supposed to tell random strangers on the internet they're scum bags?

Why not?

Yes, some people, especially insecure beta males, have an unhealthy admiration of psychopaths, because they think they're strong or powerful. But as I already mentioned.

Well, you're not male, so I'll just settle on the notion that you don't understand male lived experience.

 

[Thalassa]

Why not?



Well, you're not male, so I'll just settle on the notion that you don't understand male lived experience.

Because it's not professional or even handed, and yes the people I see predominantly admiring psychopaths are insecure beta males.

 

[blahblahbob]

Because it's not professional or even handed, and yes the people I see predominantly admiring psychopaths are insecure beta males.

I see, so the fact that a person doesn't feel any sympathy for suffering animals is worthy of fair praise? It's not superficially charming enough to say: "you're sick in the head."

Although, you brought up Oprah earlier, and 95% of those shows are run by psychopaths who exploit and denigrate weak and powerless people for profit while maintaining their nice superficial charm.

I don't know enough about Oprah to say one way or the other.

 

[Thalassa]

I see, so the fact that a person doesn't feel any sympathy for suffering animals is worthy of fair praise? It's not superficially charming enough to say: "you're sick in the head."

Although, you brought up Oprah earlier, and 95% of those shows are run by psychopaths who exploit and denigrate weak and powerless people for profit while maintaining their nice superficial charm.

I don't know enough about Oprah to say one way or the other.

You know I didn't say that at all, some people err on the side of diplomacy so that they won't be sued or lose their job or professional license, those are all real life concerns, Oxford professors can't go around calling people scum bags, there are systems in place, checks and balances, I mean he even has to put a disclaimer on the quiz because one actually can't go around throwing legal labels on people under professional credentials. I can see that you feel strongly about your values, and I certainly agree those people are disgusting, but we can't just go around having vigilante justice or we will end up with Salem Witch trials again.

I don't think Oprah is like that. She probably has some narcissistic tendencies, but I think she has real empathy and tries to help people. As for Geraldo, probably not, he's likely not of good moral character.

I'm a vegetarian by the way, so animal suffering is a big deal to me, I'm not explaining my personal feelings, I am telling you this is how the world works, and for very practical legal reasons.

 

[Mvddie]

79%


You can play hardball with the best of them! You know what you want and are not afraid to go for it – even if it means bending the rules occasionally and putting a few noses out of joint on the way. Nothing fazes you. You are decisive, self-confident and pretty much up for anything. You are a ‘means-to-an-end’ person. For you, it’s not necessarily a matter of right or wrong, but of what gets the job done. ‘Bring it on’ is your mantra, but to help those around you keep their heads, you should learn some tricks to help you temper your self-satisfying tendencies...

That was a pathetic amount of questions for it to determine anything... Not sure why they're so positive about my results?

 

[á´…eparted]

They didn't just participate, they altered their bylaws for that explicit purpose. Dr. Paul McHugh, former dean of Psychiatry at John Hopkins, has taken issue with the credibility of a lot of disorders the APA has been putting out, suggesting they're straying into the territory of social engineering rather than helping sick people, in so many words. I believe him to some extent on that account - especially given their apparent belief that sadistic behavior is actually not a disorder.

The APA has assisted in numerous government experiments and projects which violated the Nuremberg code over the past decades - I trust them about as much as I trust the USSR's psychological establishment.

After reading your exchange with Marmotini it's very very apparent that you have serious problems with any form of authority.

So, just because one person takes issue it's suddenly a valid reason to disregard an entire organization? That's not logical. Let's say for example if you were to go to a psychatrist and were diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Would you suddenly not trust it or regard it simply because the APA is associated with determining what metrics are required to meet diagnostic criteria? The fact that the APA has changed their bylaws has no bearing on the utility or purpose of it.

 

[Coriolis]

Here's "chubbers" result from the psychopath test... notice it doesn't call him a scumbag for being a psychopath, but praises him for it - that about embodies everything wrong with contemporary Psych academia.

Note this test is supposedly developed by a psychology professor at Oxford.

Did you read Chubber's spoiler: this is the result he got by choosing "strongly agree" for every question, not necessarily what he would choose himself.

 

[blahblahbob]

Did you read Chubber's spoiler: this is the result he got by choosing "strongly agree" for every question, not necessarily what he would choose himself.

I kind of figured - but the point stands.

- - - Updated - - -

After reading your exchange with Marmotini it's very very apparent that you have serious problems with any form of authority.

So, just because one person takes issue it's suddenly a valid reason to disregard an entire organization? That's not logical. Let's say for example if you were to go to a psychatrist and were diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Would you suddenly not trust it or regard it simply because the APA is associated with determining what metrics are required to meet diagnostic criteria? The fact that the APA has changed their bylaws has no bearing on the utility or purpose of it.

I would not trust it because he has no empirical basis to make that assertion as there is not physical or biological test for the "disorder."

 

[á´…eparted]

I would not trust it because he has no empirical basis to make that assertion as there is not physical or biological test for the "disorder."

Wow. Guess the entire field of psychology is invalid then! We should invalidate sociology while were at it too! You very very clearly do not understand how the social sciences work.

This is what we have in this era. Of course it's working towards biological/physical tests for the disorders. There actually have been many links and studies that have been preformed on it, but that area is in it's infancy. Until then, this is what we have and it IS useful for many many people.

 

[blahblahbob]

Wow. Guess the entire field of psychology is invalid then! We should invalidate sociology while were at it too! You very very clearly do not understand how the social sciences work.

This is what we have in this era. Of course it's working towards biological/physical tests for the disorders. There actually have been many links and studies that have been preformed on it, but that area is in it's infancy. Until then, this is what we have and it IS useful for many many people.

The problem with the lack of empiricism in psychology is that it is all structured around the ideal form of behavior that the upper class expects of subordinates which is in no way an example of actual or likely biological disorder.

 

[á´…eparted]

The problem with the lack of empiricism in psychology is that it is all structured around the ideal form of behavior that the upper class expects of subordinates which is in no way an example of actual or likely biological disorder.

So in reality, you just have a personal dislike for how the world is structured, and therefore exaggerate and heavily dramatize what you see around you (which is wrong to begin with) and deem the entire field as wrong because you must be right. Dat logic. It's impressive!

That is flat irrational in every which way. Based off what I have seen of other posts of yours, you have an extremely warped picture of the world and are in no position to judge something like this.