Alternative logic systems versus sociopathic traits.

[Park]

I've notished that the logic systems of some types seems to differ a lot more from society norm than value systems does in generel. In specific, alternative logic systems seems to be a more common phenonomen among NTs and STPs than other types. As a result, I feared, for a period of time that I was an anti-social persona. Silly perhaps but not when you look at how easy it is to confuse an alternative logic system with anti-social/sociopathic traits. And while the acts carried out by a anti-social person and a person with an alternative logic system may look similar – there are clear distinctions. A person with an alternative logicsystem just acts in accordence with an alternative set of rules (it is still rules though) where as the anti-social person have neither a functional value system or logic system to base their actions on and as such does not have the same limitations when it comes to satisfy desires/urges or act on impulses.

In this "Are You A Sociopath?" ladies magazine test, I ended up at 44% and were described like this: You're not a sociopath, but you're very prone to antisocial behavior. Other people's opinions matter little to you. You live your own fringe life - for better or worse.

The test is obviously insufficient when it comes to diagnose a sociopath but the questions reflects very well society's perceptions of bad character traits. However, I'm positive that a person with an alternative logic system much more extreme than mine could reach a much much higher score and still fit the frames of a non-criminal, relatively social, relatively harmless, lovable, productive and good citizen.

I've lined up some of the questions I replied yes to and tried to explain what lies behind my answers:

You don't have a problem lying to get what you want.
To me it's a matter of cost/benefit. To me, honesty can be a virtue but so can dishonesty. They are just opposites on a scale and where I place myself depends on the situation.

You have a love/hate relationship with your parents.
I love my parents but isn't blind to the fact that I carry around younger versions of myself who feels differently.

It's hard for you to be loyal.
Again, cost/benefit.

You don't think in terms of "right" and "wrong."
Not when it comes to human behaviour.

It's hard for you to empathize with people's problems.
I answered *no* to this, just wanted to comment that a well-functioning Fe is not uncommon for a sociopath Ted Bundy was a good example.

You break people's trust
Again, cost/benefit.

You are very good at manipulating people and situations.
Yes, but skill does not equal will.

You see people as your pawns.
Yes, and at the same time I see myself as other peoples pawn. I use and let myself be used – what's wrong with that anyway?

In other words, I am from time to time deliberately a lier, disloyal, untrustworthy and a person who uses other people for my own benefit but I still consider myself to fit the methaphor profile of a good citizen.

[ptgatsby]

Reminds me of a conversation I had early on in philosophy.

Is stealing wrong? Me: Yes
What if you are starving? Me: Yes
So you'd starve rather than steal? Me: No
So it is ok to steal if you are starving? Me: No

There is something intrinsic about morality that makes people believe they always act morally. I do not agree. I know what is right and wrong, but I don't try to justify it by shifting my view to make my actions right. I simply do wrong when I must.

I hated philosophy.

Course, this is different than your utilitarian/pragmatic/self serving approach Park, but it seems that there are certain assumptions made to layman's philosophy...

[Park]

Originally Posted by ptgatsby

Reminds me of a conversation I had early on in philosophy.

Is stealing wrong? Me: Yes
What if you are starving? Me: Yes
So you'd starve rather than steal? Me: No
So it is ok to steal if you are starving? Me: No

Hey, you were the one who made me try to remember to use bad and wrong in the right context . Stealing=bad but not wrong - remember?

There is something intrinsic about morality that makes people believe they always act morally. I do not agree. I know what is right and wrong, but I don't try to justify it by shifting my view to make my actions right. I simply do wrong when I must.

I hated philosophy.

Course, this is different than your utilitarian/pragmatic/self serving approach Park, but it seems that there are certain assumptions made to layman's philosophy...

I'm not sure understand the above pt? Once again for the slow Dane please.

[ptgatsby]

Originally Posted by Park

Hey, you were the one who made me try to remember to use bad and wrong in the right context . Stealing=bad but not wrong - remember?

Depends on context This was just for arguments in class, so you assume certain stances.

I'm not sure understand the above pt? Once again for the slow Dane please.

Two seperate things;

1) I hate that morality assumes that people act in accordance to their own morality (ie: if I steal, it is because I think stealing is ok). The act of making a decision defines your morality - it seems strangely difficult to convince people that one chose to act wrongly intentionally.

2) You have a very subjective view of morality which isn't all that accepted. You believe that the choices you make are about balancing costs versus benefits... Utilitarian views measure both sides (for example, if it will help the other person lots vs hurt you a little, you'll still hurt yourself a little to help them a lot).

I find that both cases confuse a good amount of people, that's all.

[Park]

Originally Posted by ptgatsby

Two seperate things;

1) I hate that morality assumes that people act in accordance to their own morality (ie: if I steal, it is because I think stealing is ok). The act of making a decision defines your morality - it seems strangely difficult to convince people that one chose to act wrongly intentionally.

Ah get it, yes it can be usefull to remember that the phase "to practice as we preach" can be bended as well and sometimes it makes little sense not to do so - makes me think about the rule obsessive Javert from Les Misérables.

2) You have a very subjective view of morality which isn't all that accepted. You believe that the choices you make are about balancing costs versus benefits... Utilitarian views measure both sides (for example, if it will help the other person lots vs hurt you a little, you'll still hurt yourself a little to help them a lot).

I really should take a philosophy class. I think there are a lot of views and angles towards life I would find amusing but yes, after hitting it on wiki that is very close to what I am (I did say all along I wasn't a sociopath didn't I ?).

[Xander]

Interesting..

Is being a sociopath necessarily bad? No.

If being a sociopath means that you don't know the difference between right and wrong then who decides on that ability to judge and who's rights and wrongs are used as the criteria?

If it is social norms of right and wrong then could not any true free thinker be a sociopath as they only opt to uphold ideas of right and wrong which happen to coincide with those upheld by society.
[admittedly that's probably me missing something out of the exacting symptoms attributed to a sociopath]

Also interesting is the thinking that you don't always do what you think is right.

Why would a person do something unless they thought it was right? Surely all acts are justified at the point when they are committed and only subject to self recrimination afterwards?

[Park]

Originally Posted by Xander

Interesting..

Is being a sociopath necessarily bad? No.

If being a sociopath means that you don't know the difference between right and wrong then who decides on that ability to judge and who's rights and wrongs are used as the criteria?

I do think many sociopaths are aware of society norm when it comes to good and bad.

If it is social norms of right and wrong then could not any true free thinker be a sociopath as they only opt to uphold ideas of right and wrong which happen to coincide with those upheld by society.

I think there is a distinction to be made. We all have desires, urges and impulses but without an inner well-functional value or logic system to moderate our behaviour, everything becomes fair game.

Also interesting is the thinking that you don't always do what you think is right.

That wasn't me but ptgatsby. He thinks e.g. stealing is bad (i.e. the act of stealing has a negative value to begin with) but would under the right circumstances do it anyway.

I'm different, stealing has a neutral value to me but obtains either a negative or positive value depending on the situation the theft is carried out in.

Why would a person do something unless they thought it was right?

For e.g. Christians, stealing has a negative value to begin with but unless they are redicurlessly obsessed with text book rules - it doesn't mean that they wouldn't steal under the right circumstances.

[Park]

Originally Posted by ptgatsby

Is stealing wrong? Me: Yes
What if you are starving? Me: Yes
So you'd starve rather than steal? Me: No
So it is ok to steal if you are starving? Me: No

To make an example, my version of ptgatsby stealing questionary would look like this:
Is stealing wrong? Me: It can be.
What if you are starving? Me: It can be.
So you'd starve rather than steal? Me: Depends on the situation.
So it is ok to steal if you are starving? Me: Depends on the situation

[Xander]

Originally Posted by Park

I do think many sociopaths are aware of society norm when it comes to good and bad.

Are they aware of it as "the societies norm" or as a value which is desirable? It's a critical distinction I think.

Originally Posted by Park

I think there is a distinction to be made. We all have desires, urges and impulses but without an inner well-functional value or logic system to moderate our behaviour, everything becomes fair game.

I knew for many years that 2+2=4 but I only understood it a few years ago.
I studied maths in school and was taught that a minus multiplied by a minus is a plus but only once I'd reached university did it occur to me to ask why and then understood (thought I've forgotten it now).

Before understanding how can you say it's your value? Imposed values are not your own. A freethinking mind looks at why it may be bad to kill by disregarding the imposed values. Only after they have done this do they decide if killing is bad or not.

That's the difference I'm thinking of.

Originally Posted by Park

That wasn't me but ptgatsby. He thinks e.g. stealing is bad (i.e. the act of stealing has a negative value to begin with) but would under the right circumstances do it anyway.

What interests me is that if he can do it anyway then does he validate doing it? If he validates doing it then what is the difference between that and it being right? If the only difference is the period for which the validation stands then it still stands that at that instance it was evaluated as the right thing to do.

Originally Posted by Park

I'm different, stealing has a neutral value to me but obtains either a negative or positive value depending on the situation the theft is carried out in.

Is that different, more honest or just cynical though?

Originally Posted by Park

For e.g. Christians, stealing has a negative value to begin with but unless they are redicurlessly obsessed with text book rules - it doesn't mean that they wouldn't steal under the right circumstances.

Exterior values again. Are they the same thing?

(Oh and Park, you got Firefox? It spell checks. Oh and I'm not scoring points off you dear. That's partially why I use it )

[Xander]

Good idea.
My version.

Q. Is stealing wrong?
A. As a generalisation, yes.

Q. What if you are starving?
A. Again as a generalisation, yes but in terms of stealing food from someone who will not suffer unduly from it's absence then possibly not. In fact probably not as life is worth more than food in my opinion.

Q. So you'd starve rather than steal?
A. No. That'd be martyring myself for something I do not value that highly.

Q. So it is ok to steal if you are starving?
A. Absolutely it CAN be. Depending upon circumstances.

How'd I do?

Am I sociopath yet?