Psychopathic cannibals

Started by Lerxst, August 31, 2015, 02:58:56 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Songleaves

#15
I.... uh... am very sorry, that was actually a joke, I don't really think I'm a psychopath. Psychopathy isn't even a sanctioned medical diagnosis, although many ideas of psychopathy have been put forward. But since you wrote all this out I will go ahead and respond!

QuoteThe reason I ask Is because from what I've read its far more likely that you'd be a sociopath then a psychopath if you find something like cannibalism "Gross" as that seem like an emotional or gut reaction.

Psychopaths are usually regarded as emotionally shallow, lacking in empathy and remorse, but not totally lacking in any emotion, after all it's not like their entire limbic system has just disappeared. A mild squeamishness isn't incompatible.

Also I will question attaching the qualifier of violent to those with anti-social personality disorder as was done in that graphic. In general there are many different types of psychological conditions that are only ever studied through mandatory psyche sessions through the criminal justice system because people who have these conditions do not seek out treatment themselves, therefore we only see the violent people with these conditions. We simply don't have the demographic data to well characterize these groups, and that is why violent behavior is not mandatory for diagnosis with anti-social personality disorder. Additionally, although it has been classically viewed that such people lack empathy, it has been an emerging view that such individuals are just adept at compartmentalizing and ignoring empathy, and do so to further their own selfish interests, rather than them simply lacking the ability to experience empathy all together. Personally, I believe lacking in empathy, and being able to manipulate other's, is a paradox, so I agree with the emerging view and I believe that if someone truly lacked any empathy they would be a potato, but that's just my view on the matter.

JesterHell

Its probably my fault for not getting the joke, its hard to get a sense of infliction from text.

I will admit that a part of my motivation for asking is that many people on the internet self-diagnose, my grand-mother for instance has every disease she reads about.  ::)


I know about the problem getting accurate data ASPD because as one psychiatrist said sociopaths/psychopaths don't seek help and have no motivation to get better, its generally society and the law that want's them to be "Fixed" while they are perfectly content being what they are.

As for violence I'm sure not all people with ASPD are violent criminals they just don't have any moral qualms about being violent to get what they want, there is also some evidence to suggest that really ruthless businessmen, you know the ones that will do anything they can get away with to succeed have sociopathic tendency's and like many psychological conditions they aren't mutually exclusive, you can have multiple conditions and can make it difficult to tell where one ends and another begins impacting data gathering further.

As for empathy I think fits rather well was an analogy I read.

Have you ever slept on your arm and woken up with it feeling dead or numb? you can still feel it there but finer sensations are dulled to the point to where its almost unnoticeable, well that's what having ASPD is like, your empathy is numbed making it easy to ignore or just not notice at all.

So how much sensation remains would very between people but there enough of a base line that even the "Deadest" can mimic what they see even if they don't "feel" it themselves and while I don't that its a perfect description as is the case for most analogy's, I do think it can give some understanding to a laymen.

One thing that I do like about this thread is that its lead me to learning about a subject that I've only ever learnt about though documentary's on serial killers, which provides a very limited view on the subject.

SaintD

Being psychopathic does not mean you have no sense of right and wrong, no ethics, or no morals. While there are aspects to psychopathy and sociopathy that are fundamentally different from the norm, that doesn't mean anyone who is psychopathic or sociopathic is some sort of cartoonish chaotic evil facsimile of a human. An inability to feel empathy or remorse doesn't mean you're somehow immune to the social conditioning inherent to society.

A psychopath can, and likely is as a general rule, just as disgusted about eating human meat as anyone else. It's a socially conditioned taboo response that doesn't necessarily require any empathy at all.

blub01

Quote from: SaintD on September 02, 2015, 01:12:15 PM
Being psychopathic does not mean you have no sense of right and wrong, no ethics, or no morals. While there are aspects to psychopathy and sociopathy that are fundamentally different from the norm, that doesn't mean anyone who is psychopathic or sociopathic is some sort of cartoonish chaotic evil facsimile of a human. An inability to feel empathy or remorse doesn't mean you're somehow immune to the social conditioning inherent to society.

A psychopath can, and likely is as a general rule, just as disgusted about eating human meat as anyone else. It's a socially conditioned taboo response that doesn't necessarily require any empathy at all.

but, as he doesn't feel a moral obligation or something, he should get along with it when there is no other choice. i think.
Quote from: Zobaken on September 02, 2015, 12:37:37 AM
1. Please make people unable to move through deep waters. I don't like raiders cosplaying Jesus.

StorymasterQ

I think at least some of the issues that lead to the rampant misunderstandings is the thinking that psychopaths/sociopaths has no morals/ethics/sense of right etc.

Consider this:
RIGHT----------MEH-----------WRONG-------------------------------->FUCKING WRONG

Where would you put [yourself, a psychopath, a sociopath] on that scale for the following activities:

  • Caring for chickens
  • Killing chickens
  • Eating chickens
  • Petting kittens
  • Killing kittens
  • Eating kittens
  • Hugging a person
  • Killing a person
  • Eating a person

A normal person would probably go from left to right and back again. How about a psychopath? A sociopath? Should they be MEH for all the above? Would they? Would there not be any wavering to the left or right side?
I like how this game can result in quotes that would be quite unnerving when said in public, out of context. - Myself

The dubious quotes list is now public. See it here

JesterHell

Quote from: SaintD on September 02, 2015, 01:12:15 PM
A psychopath can, and likely is as a general rule, just as disgusted about eating human meat as anyone else. It's a socially conditioned taboo response that doesn't necessarily require any empathy at all.

Did you read my overly long posts or check the links I provided?

One of the defining things about ASPD is that they don't care about "socially conditioned taboo's".

QuoteThe fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), released by the American Psychiatric Association in 2013, lists both sociopathy and psychopathy under the heading of Antisocial Personality Disorders (ASPD). These disorders share many common behavioral traits which lead to the confusion between them. Key traits that sociopaths and psychopaths share include:

    A disregard for laws and social mores
    A disregard for the rights of others
    A failure to feel remorse or guilt
    A tendency to display violent behavior

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wicked-deeds/201401/how-tell-sociopath-psychopath


So why is it disgusting if not for morals or societal mores?

akiceabear

Quote from: JesterHell on September 02, 2015, 10:04:52 PM
Did you read my overly long posts or check the links I provided?

One of the defining things about ASPD is that they don't care about "socially conditioned taboo's".

You've also ignored posts the stated there are biological/health reasons against cannibalism, not just socially conditioned mores.

JesterHell

Quote from: StorymasterQ on September 02, 2015, 10:00:46 PM
I think at least some of the issues that lead to the rampant misunderstandings is the thinking that psychopaths/sociopaths has no morals/ethics/sense of right etc.

Consider this:
RIGHT----------MEH-----------WRONG-------------------------------->FUCKING WRONG

Where would you put [yourself, a psychopath, a sociopath] on that scale for the following activities:

  • Caring for chickens
  • Killing chickens
  • Eating chickens
  • Petting kittens
  • Killing kittens
  • Eating kittens
  • Hugging a person
  • Killing a person
  • Eating a person

A normal person would probably go from left to right and back again. How about a psychopath? A sociopath? Should they be MEH for all the above? Would they? Would there not be any wavering to the left or right side?

its not so much as they have none, evidence suggests that they do have personal values, its just there values are entirely independent from society's values, to put it another way they can freely choose what their values are rather then following "Gut Feelings" about whats right and wrong.

I'm a morale relativist https://philosophynow.org/issues/82/Morality_is_a_Culturally_Conditioned_Response so in my mind there is no correct answer to your question as its all dependent on your subjective morale values which are largely formed during childhood and refined during adolescents.

You can tell a child "Its wrong don't do it" during that age when they believe anything and their likely to believe it but as they get older reasons "why" are needed, this is the issue animal rights groups have in trying to convince adults because they've learnt a value system and require reasons to change it.

JesterHell

Quote from: akiceabear on September 02, 2015, 10:35:21 PM

You've also ignored posts the stated there are biological/health reasons against cannibalism, not just socially conditioned mores.

No I didn't  ???, I stated that I don't believe that its an adequate reason for disgust.

Quote from: JesterHell on September 01, 2015, 12:45:38 AM

To say that the heath concerns would stop a psychopath is something I find that doubtful not only do most people not know of these issues but I've read a couple psychology articles and the consensus I got was that sociopaths are concerned about taking risks but but are hot-headed while psychopaths don't suffer stress or anxiety about risk taking and cold-hearted and calculating.

I think its unlikely that a psychopath would be so concerned about the health issues of cannibalism as to suffer a mood penalty.

while everybody here as access to the internet and can find out what the health risks are the main purpose of the thread is if the in-game psychopaths should get a penalty and I don't think most rimworlders would have the required knowledge to have strong feeling about the health issues.

But lets say they did have that knowledge at best it would be a reduced penalty that's not as strong as the base line "emotional" one and while you might not eliminate the risks you can reduce them if you have it "Burn to a Crisp" instead of "Bloody as Hell" because the main reason for cooking food in the first place is to reduce the risk of parasites and disease.

akiceabear

JesterHell - I disagree - I think you're being too reductionist here. Also, this thread is turning into a silly debate/troll, so I'm ducking out. Just voicing one last time that I think separation of the traits makes sense and is good for gameplay.

MultiDavid

When you read the cannibal trait, it states something around the lines of the person having ''tried it once and liked it''.

Now, this doesn't imply that the cannibal person actually killed, or doesn't care, about the person he/she ate, it just states that he/she likes the taste of human meat, now, a cannibal psychopath would simply not care, while a normal cannibal might.

Lerxst

I don't think a Psychopath would necessarily enjoy cannibalism or receive a buff from it. Psychopathy in psychological terms is similar to extreme selfishness; it's one of the many things on the checklist professionals look for when coming up with a diagnosis.

Now, they simply might not like human flesh the same as they might not like asparagus, that's fine. But as far as a Psychopath is concerned, a chunk of meat is a chunk of meat. "Bob's dead. He doesn't need his leg anymore. Gimme!"

JesterHell

Quote from: akiceabear on September 02, 2015, 11:12:29 PM
JesterHell - I disagree - I think you're being too reductionist here. Also, this thread is turning into a silly debate/troll, so I'm ducking out. Just voicing one last time that I think separation of the traits makes sense and is good for gameplay.

I never said you have to agree, your entitled to your opinion.

I disagree with the "reductionist" statement as I never said that being a psychopath is being a cannibal (correlation is not causation) just that the reason that they are not cannibals is not connected to morality, empathy or social more's and when you remove these reason whats left? also I never wanted psychopaths to get a bonus to mood for cannibalism I just don't think that a penalty applies.

A silly debate would be debating if the theory of relativity is true, not what the affects of an already in-game trait should be and as for being a troll? a troll does not give links to references or make arguments that are based on professional data? I do however like playing "devils advocate" and if you consider that being a troll then I worry about the future of debating as a whole.

Quotea devil's advocate is someone who, given a certain argument, takes a position they do not necessarily agree with (or simply an alternative position from the accepted norm), for the sake of debate or to explore the thought further. In taking this position, the individual taking on and playing the devil's advocate role seeks to engage others in an argumentative discussion process. The purpose of such a process is typically to test the quality of the original argument and identify weaknesses in its structure, and to use such information to either improve or abandon the original, opposing position


blub01

It is pretty much done by now, considering that we've had all arguments stated at least twice. we could just, like, make a poll or something, and when people post an actually new thought on the matter, it gets included.

first 3 options would be
1. Psychopaths should be unaffected by cannibalism(my opinion)
2. Psychopaths should get a minor mood penalty due to them not liking the health issues
3. Psychopaths should(for whatever reason) be just as disgusted as non-psychopaths

oh, and to entirely change the nature of the thread, what about some "high-functioning sociopath" trait that gives every trait +5/+10 or something, and makes the AI better, Sherlock(the TV series called "Sherlock", don't really know the "real Sherlock Holmes, or other tv series) like?
Quote from: Zobaken on September 02, 2015, 12:37:37 AM
1. Please make people unable to move through deep waters. I don't like raiders cosplaying Jesus.

SaintD

#29
Quote from: JesterHell on September 02, 2015, 10:04:52 PMDid you read my overly long posts or check the links I provided?

Yes, except the problem is you're taking a layman's totalitarian view from cherry picked and poorly understood sources. 'Disregard for laws and social mores' is not some sort of on/off switch, and the things you're quoting are simplified guidelines regarding extremely complicated clinical diagnosis of inherently unique individuals, which you've dragged out of a tiny article. Even one of your own links will quickly tell you that 'psychopath' is not a clinical term and doesn't exist as a diagnosis, which is why you're also quoting from an article by a criminologist who is describing what is basically criminal 'psychopathy' because that's the lens through which he is describing the term.

That's the crux of the problem. You're trying to mash a 'Hollywood Psychopath' criminal stereotype into what is actually referred to as antisocial personality disorder by the psychology institution, and backing it up using an article written by....drumroll....a criminologist. Had you actually bothered to pick out the Hollywood criminal view of psychopathy as presented by a guy whose activities include publishing books about serial killers, and instead investigated the root psychological concerns in the catchall morass of 'psychopath', you wouldn't be acting like psychopaths are some sort of Hannibal cutout who'll uncaringly start eating people when their plane crashes in the mountains.