Amazon.com Widgets

Can a Sociopath be a net positive contributor to society over his/her lifetime?

Asked by: cludwig
  • Yes and No , my story.

    A sociopath is a sociopath no matter what, I am one too. I have problem controling myself , I am one of the " inteligent" sociopaths , I could very well lie in this article and you wouldn't know. I like to harm people in any possible way, BUT when I get myself comfortable and people seek help and I am the only one who can help them, I become one of the best people on earth, at least for them. I like to hurt because I have reasons and sometimes a nasty selfdefence "system" and hate management, but when this doesn't happens I actually love to help people, this again is another "problem" because I'm thinking ,no matter what , at possible ways to hurt them. But, with a bit of control and throwing away in the trash bin some ideas , I end up being a very good friend and advisor for at least 5 minutes until I get pissed off again and began fakeing my feelings. Hope you understand now some thing and I'm sorry for my english, I am from Romania and still I'm very young and don't know every rule of english speaking and spelling.

  • I'm a sociopath, and a good person.

    I follow a strict, ideologically based and rational moral code. Yes, I still have issues with impulse control and dominating people in conversations, crushing them emotionally in arguments, etc, aspects of my personality which I try to keep in check, but I also actively contribute to improving my society every day in ways that not only might save lives, but are more rationally analyzed and considered to maximum effect than might be someone acting altruistic because they feel bad for a particular individual or animal they saw in a commercial (A good example of this was the program to rescue pets from New Orleans rooftops during Katrina while {mostly black} human victims of the tragedy were still suffering and dying on other rooftops). Here's another point; It is detailed in the book "Ordinary Men" how the Nazis conditioned psychologically normal people to participate in the holocaust. You don't do it by preventing them from feeling empathy. You do it by getting them to place their victims OUTSIDE your circle of empathy. Certainly, during these times, sociopaths without moral codes, and with broken moral codes, are all too happy to participate. However, a sociopath WITH a rational moral code, who is used to acting altruistically not because he feels he should but because he deduces he should, would, I believe be not only uniquely resistant to this sort of psychological and moral pressure, but uniquely equipped to do what is necessary to effectively resist social pressure to comply, however it is applied.

  • I'm a sociopath, and a good person

    I follow a strict, ideologically based and rational moral code. Yes, I still have issues with impulse control and dominating people in conversations, crushing them emotionally in arguments, etc, aspects of my personality which I try to keep in check, but I also actively contribute to improving my society every day in ways that not only might save lives, but are more rationally analyzed and considered to maximum effect than might be someone acting altruistic because they feel bad for a particular individual or animal they saw in a commercial (A good example of this was the program to rescue pets from New Orleans rooftops during Katrina while {mostly black} human victims of the tragedy were still suffering and dying on other rooftops). Here's another point; It is detailed in the book "Ordinary Men" how the Nazis conditioned psychologically normal people to participate in the holocaust. You don't do it by preventing them from feeling empathy. You do it by getting them to place their victims OUTSIDE your circle of empathy. Certainly, during these times, sociopaths without moral codes, and with broken moral codes, are all too happy to participate. However, a sociopath WITH a rational moral code, who is used to acting altruistically not because he feels he should but because he deduces he should, would, I believe be not only uniquely resistant to this sort of psychological and moral pressure, but uniquely equipped to do what is necessary to effectively resist social pressure to comply, however it is applied.

  • Yes they can, there are plenty of reasons to avoid or oppose violence besides emotion

    Many humanitarians and activists including Gandhi and MLK show possible signs of sociopathy. One does not need an emotional reaction to violence in order to oppose it. Many people in their everyday lives use "emotional" to simply mean that they have a stance they strongly believe in. In that sense many sociopaths are "emotional". However in psychology emotion has a more specific meaning of referring to the presence of sensations in the body that go along with this.

    A person who strongly opposes violence but lacks any major bodily sensations in response to violence could actually be far more effective in dealing with it and opposing it. Whereas another person may feel a strong bodily sensation experience it as "fear" and then run away a sociopath would experience no such sensation stand his ground, chant "we are not afraid" and demonstrate social power by not being effected by the violence.

    If anything without sociopaths we'd all be living under tyranny. Yes sociopaths can sometimes make the worst tyrants, but not all tyrants are sociopaths. Emotions do not always lead people to do good. It takes sociopaths with good agendas to oppose tyrants both sociopathic tyrants and ones that are not.

    Good sociopaths can be much like the Vulcans of Star Trek having a morality based around logic. And if most people were sociopaths social teachings of morality would revolve around logic rather than emotion and we'd be talking about illogical, emotional people as being amoral.

  • Do you know how many people are scociopaths

    I forget the statistic but a large proportion of people are scociopaths or phsycopaths . These people have a dulled response to violence , that doesn't mean they will be violent . Scociopaths and phsycopaths alike often have great success in directing , writing , and acting ( obviously many other areas are included . In fact at one point thought i. Was a scociopath ( turns out I was just an INTJ ).
    Yes scociopaths and phsycopaths do commit more crimes I'm not denying that but most of them live a normal productive life . Most of the time you don't even know they are a scociopath because they act very normal ( most of the time ).

  • Of course they can!

    Never in the history of mankind has any given mental illness been sufficient to derive the behaviors and impacts of a person. "x"-pathy is not a condemning state no different than depression does not mean you cannot smile, mania does not mean you cannot meditate, and schizophrenia does not mean you are condemned to a state of the inability to function in society. The productivity of a person and impact of a person is defined by choices not by inherent traits.

  • Sociopath is an outdated term, Psychopath is what you most likely meant

    And yes, it is possible for them to be a positive contributor to society. Lets cover the basics first, what is a psychopath? Psychopath are defined by having shallow emotions, with little to no fear, empathy, guilt, stress tolerance, they are narcissistic, charismatic, manipulative, and impulsive. The hedonistic treadmill is literally their only moral compass.

    No one believes they are "wholesome" people by definition they have a biological mental disorder, but the question is phrased as societal contribution, even lowering the bar by asking if "any" psychopath can be a positive contribute. The obvious answer is yes, especially when psychopathy is a spectrum, and thus there are higher functioning psychopaths out there.

    Psychopaths are people of action because they have nothing to hold them back conscious wise and thus are attracted to power and influence. They comprise a good portion of media/journalists, politicians / civil servants, and positions of authority/prestige such as lawyers / police officers / clergy. There are studies out showing how closely politicians and serial killers share a lot of brain patterns, also there has been another study showing where psychopaths frequent for jobs (none of the jobs study show what % though)

    Obviously we support psychopaths who are actively targeting our enemies political or otherwise out of their need for action, wealth, or admiration, or defend us for the very same reasons.

    For example Obama may very well be a psychopath (no trolling, I'm also not going on whether Obama is a positive contributor or not either, so don't eat me on that comment). Here is also another example of a Neuroscientist who discovered he was a psychopath who had numerous serial killers in his family tree he didn't even know about. Here is a youtube link of him, you can explore more sites if you want to hear him explain in more detail on the matter.

    Https://www.Youtube.Com/watch?V=cnV4RnWcmWo

    If the question is whether or not psychopaths have an overall positive impact on society, that would be a difficult question to argue in the pro because almost all serial killers are psychopaths, which is a pretty hard negative to counter considering that the "positive" figures are more controversial and subjective, but there are good chances your fearless bomb squad or unflinching surgeon might have a few psychopathic tendencies.

  • Sociopaths always leave a legacy of hurt and destruction.

    I have yet to encounter a testimonial where a Sociopath was proved to be an agent of good for the people that surround them, and society as a whole. Certainly most scam artists, and most of those who use and abuse others without remorse fall under the category of Sociopath. If it is true that Sociopaths only have a negative impact on the world, then of what value are they if any?

  • There is no such thing as sociopaths. It's not a real condition.

    There is no such thing as sociopathy in modern psychology. It is a term used by literary individuals to describe symptoms/conditions of psychopathy.

    There are four traits a psychopathic individual will often exhibit, but these are not universal, nor are they concrete.

    The interpersonal - This is how they communicate, usually terse, usually a bit glib, sometimes they can even project delusions of grandeur. They can also be pathologically deceptive. AGAIN NONE OF THIS IS UNIVERSAL.

    The Lifestyle - impulsive, brash, bored, lazy, irresponsible and parasitic.

    The Affective - this is their outward demeanor, lack of empathy, lack of remorse, lack of concern. THIS DOES NOT MEAN LACK OF EMOTION. All creatures feel emotion. Even psychopaths. Especially psychopaths in some instances.

    The antisocial - Poor social behavior, aversion to conformity (to common courtesy, not politics or opinion), lack of behavioral control.

    "Unhealthy" sexual behaviors bridge the interpersonal and antisocial. Usually they take the form of sexual exploitation/conquest and short, impersonal relationships.

    None of this means a psychopath will behave in this way. None of it means they will behave differently than these examples. There are 7 billion human beings in this world, and psychopathy is learned, not inherited, so there are countless people who bridge the specturm.

    Psychology is very fluid, and changes as one experiences stimuli and develops experiences.


    It is impossible to say Sociopaths contribute a net good or a net bad because they don't exist.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.