You think?
The woman is utterly delusional. She states that she is "generally free from irrational emotions" right after describing a "megalomaniacal fantasy" in which she strangles a jobsworth. The extent of her murderous rage is utterly irrational. In fact, she is ensnared by irrational emotions - all the more so because of her lack of self-insight. Lack of self-awareness/self-knowledge is a side effect of empathy deficit. We come to understand ourselves by coming to understand others, not the other way around. So she is not just interpersonally impaired, but intrapersonally impaired. Stalking the guy through the mall only to impotently decide to do nothing at all is kinda lame. In what way is that perfect, to you? What did she actually accomplish?
She definitely has irrational something going on - I'm not sure it's emotions. What I meant by the escalator incident is how she is totally unfazed by the security person, criticising her for something petty and inconsequential. Those people are often on power trips. which are fed by the reflexive deference and even fear of ordinary folks. This woman's attitude of "this is not important and I am not about to be bothered by it" would serve the rest of us well in many cases.
As for how successful she is, yes, sociopaths can do well, especially in Law (it's easier to float to the top in certain professions if you untether yourself from any kind of moral constraints - you're still only on top of a pile of shit), but they are consummate liars. We can't take anything this woman says on faith. And from the situations she cites as "successes", she presents quite a pathetic figure, in my view. They are broken people, more pitiable than enviable.
Well, church involvements aside, I consider this woman's accomplishments quite admirable. Her methods, obviously, are more controversial. I find myself identifying with much but not all of the perspectives she shares, which is why I am not a psychopath, just someone who might share some of their qualities. The big difference is that I do have a conscience, and deliberately cause harm to others only for a very good reason. (Some find even this morally objectionable, which all comes down to values.)
There are two dimensions to psychopathy, as measured by the PPI: fearless-dominance and impulsive-antisociality. It is the latter dimension that is linked to sadism/cruelty and criminality. Psychopaths who manage to stay out of the criminal justice system are likely lower on this dimension.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2819310/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2916168/#!po=83.3333
http://www.sltinfo.com/autism-and-theory-of-mind.html
Autists (paradoxically, given the derivation of the word) also have a defective sense of self. They are unable to properly distinguish between self and other. This probably exacerbates the problem, because to be able to offer assistance (empathic response) one must be able to effectively suppress one's own distress.
Psychopaths have no problem with theory of mind - which is what makes them such successful manipulators. If they did not have this cognitive aspect of empathy, they would not be able to charm and ingratiate. They are the definition of Machiavellian. Where they have a deficit is in pairing that cognition with what we regard as appropriate affect - concern for the other person or even themselves.
The first one seems rather inconclusive, with psychopaths' reactions similar to those of the control in some respects, and showing unexpected sensitivity to pain situations in others, contradicting earlier studies. In any case, the sample size is very small. The abstract conclusion "These preliminary findings suggest that youth with aggressive CD exhibit an atypical pattern of neural response to viewing others in pain that should be explored in further studies." about sums it up. The ability to map brain functions through fMRI should lead to more studies like this, and hopefully more understanding of the underlying physiology.
The second article is interesting in linking hyperactivity of the dopamine reward system with the psychopathic quality of impulsive, risk-taking behavior. This contradicts, however, the stereotype of a psychopath carefully plotting whatever action he/she is going to take, with great patience and control (like the woman setting up the romantic trio). Is the stereotype wrong, or just applicable to a small set of psychopaths, perhaps those with "high IQ"?
The one on autism was especially interesting, and suggests my estimation of empathy was backwards, with affective empathy being stronger than cognitive. I know only one autistic person and see her only infrequently, so I'm not surprised I had it wrong. The doll test is clever. I would not have considered autistic people and psychopaths to be similar, though, with that ability to manipulate being a significant discriminator.
I don't see how anyone can describe a psychopath's life as fulfilling. The condition entails blunted affect which necessarily entails a blunted feeling of fulfilment, even if their relationship issues did not.
Interesting. Something drives psychopaths to do what they do, though. Even the woman in the article you linked. She got something out of stalking the man in the mall, or setting up the romantic trio, otherwise she would not have put the effort into it. What was that?