Psychiatry moves forward: defining the psychopath

Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10634
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Psychiatry moves forward: defining the psychopath

It has annoyed me that psychopathy was so poorly understood. Psychopaths are referred to as having few or no emotions compared to "normal" people. I always knew it was bullshit. Finally, someone agrees with me, and has started to prove just how wrong the way we look at psychopaths is.

ScienceDaily (July 13, 2012)
Ice cold, hard and emotionless. Such is the psychopath -- we think. Until we get a glimpse behind the mask. Researchers have for decades been almost unanimous in their accord with the popular perception that psychopaths are made in a certain way, and will forever remain that way.
But Aina Gullhaugen, a researcher at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, disagrees.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120713122925.htm

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
That is a particular subject

That is a particular subject that has always fascinated me for some reason and I am still not sure where I stand on it.

I think a lot of people get the definition of sociopath/psychopath and serial killers indivisible when I have read enough about it to know that is not necessarily the case. Serial killers tend to have some sort of sexual pleasure out of inflicting torture and ultimately killing. Sociopaths/Psychopaths exist in many walks of life and some may never break the law or see the inside of a jail cell. They simply have the personality type. Now, we could get very technical and delve into everything from anti-social personality disorders to narcissistic behavior disorders, but that makes it a little more complex.

Interesting article, thanks for posting that.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
Good article

I have been reading about various people - individually and collectively - who have done, or participated in, what most people consider to be horrendous criminal acts against other people.  This article is good start towards understanding.

My thought has been that people who perhaps fit the DSM-IV definition of psycho-social disorder feel the pain within themselves and within others, but they have learned an incorrect response to that pain.  If you have a caregiver who does not respond to your pain, how can you learn to respond to others' pain? 

It goes for pedophiles as well.  They, too, grew up with care givers who were also neglectful or abusive.  Their acting out is a result of that early childhood pain. 

I do not codon anyone who hurts another person - young, old, or anywhere in between - but it is not helpful to dismiss these people as hopelessly untreatable.  As Dr. Gullhaugen says, we need to better understand what safe, social interactions are appropriate for the particular offender.  Warehousing them is expensive and cruel.  There may be better options for the individual and for society.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3641
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
  It's not as if sociopaths

  It's not as if sociopaths don't create their own forums and discuss what makes them "tick".  

      www.sociopathworld.com

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
I believe it is the culture

I believe it is the culture of a competitive society that inevitable creates such people. I think chalking it up to they are bad or their genetics is a big mistake.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3641
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:I believe it is

EXC wrote:

I believe it is the culture of a competitive society that inevitable creates such people. I think chalking it up to they are bad or their genetics is a big mistake.

 

      They ( sociopaths ) are abnormal.  Being abnormal does not have to encompass a moral dimension.   Conjoined twins are abnormal that doesn't make them evil.

     Many, many personality disorders are genetic in origin.  I know of what I speak because I have lived my entire life with one.   My two brothers grew up in the same environment and are nothing like me.  I am most certainly abnormal in that regard.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3641
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Psychopaths are

Vastet wrote:
Psychopaths are referred to as having few or no emotions compared to "normal" people.

 

   Sociopaths have no emotions ?   That's just as misinformed as people who think schizophrenia is the same thing as multiple personality disorder.  Sociopaths can have intense emotional responses but none of those emotions will be based upon the needs or welfare of others.  They do not lack emotions, they lack empathy.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10634
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:Vastet

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

Vastet wrote:
Psychopaths are referred to as having few or no emotions compared to "normal" people.

 

   Sociopaths have no emotions ?   That's just as misinformed as people who think schizophrenia is the same thing as multiple personality disorder.  Sociopaths can have intense emotional responses but none of those emotions will be based upon the needs or welfare of others.  They do not lack emotions, they lack empathy.

This study shows they don't lack empathy, and you are as bad for characterising them thus as others are who characterise them as cold and unfeeling.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3641
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:This study

Vastet wrote:
This study shows they don't lack empathy, and you are as bad for characterising them thus as others are who characterise them as cold and unfeeling.

 

    I characterize them in the same way that they characterize themselves. , lol.    Go to psychforums.com and find "Anti Social Personality Disorder".    Or go to the link that I provided in my first post. 

 

    {edit:  as far as this "study" is concerned,  you should know that many sociopaths...at least the high functioning ones...are frequently experts at reading other people, including mental health experts, and deftly manipulating them simply for their own amusement. }

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10634
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Reading someone requires

Reading someone requires empathy. It's basic psychology.

Also, it is the fool who doctors himself. Listening to a few psych ward regulars try and diagnose themselves is hardly the best way to study the condition.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3641
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Reading someone

Vastet wrote:
Reading someone requires empathy.

 

  No, it doesn't.   It requires observation.     For example, an actor need not actually be insane to mimic insanity, that's why it's called acting. 

Sociopaths study NT's and learn to imitate our normal emotional responses ( such as a sense of empathy/compassion/fear ), and they do this to avoid detection.  They eventually learn how normal people think and feel and many sociopaths become experts in manipulating others because they've decoded our general behavior patterns simply by observing us.

 

Vaste wrote:
... Also, it is the fool who doctors himself. Listening to a few psych ward regulars try and diagnose themselves is hardly the best way to study the condition.

 

      I'm sure you thoroughly perused the links I provided in order to make that determination,  lol.    And sociopaths who feel empathy ?  Is that like albinos with dark skin ? 

 

                

 

 

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


Watcher
atheist
Posts: 2326
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
One time I was doing a

One time I was doing a search online relating to IQ and pedophilia and stumbled across a forum of self-proclaimed pedophiles.

Now these people weren't actually giving into their desires.  There was no talk of committing crimes or trading of child porn or anything like that.

These were just people who admitted they were sexually attracted mainly to little kids but realized that they could not act upon those innate desires.  And the forum consisted of both men and women.

Man, how bad would that suck?  Just like some people are naturally attracted to members of their own genders these people were naturally attracted to prepubescent children.

Unlike homosexuals though, these people couldn't organize a pedophile parade or fight in congress for the right to marry kindergartners.

You know though, everytime I've seen some 6' 6" tall dude married to a 4'11" flat chested woman I've kind of wondered what that was all about.  Maybe they were dealing with some form of pedophilia urges in the only legal way they could.

 

"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10634
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote: No,

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
No, it doesn't.   It requires observation.  

Yes it does. Observation without empathy is near useless.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
For example, an actor need not actually be insane to mimic insanity, that's why it's called acting.

Actors are empathetic.

Try again when you've got more than opinions.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3641
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote: Try again

Vastet wrote:
Try again when you've got more than opinions.

  

              Ha ha, that's funny Vastet I was going to say the same thing to you.  

 

                        {  ...btw, does that mean we share empathy or was I imitating you based upon how you typically reply on this forum ?  Maybe I'm an "empathetic" sociopath ? }

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10634
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
My evidence is in the OP.

My evidence is in the OP. Yours is nowhere to be seen. Typical victory for me.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3641
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote: Typical

Vastet wrote:
Typical victory for me.

 

         Well, I wouldn't say a "victory" for you, but yes you are responding in your typical manner.  I agree with that much.

 

  Oh, by the way Vastet I googled "sociopath" and lo and behold lack of empathy is listed as a defining characteristic.  Coincidence ?

 http://www.lovefraud.com/01_whatsaSociopath/key_symptoms_sociopath.html

 

           

 

          

 

        

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10634
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
The loser rarely admits

The loser rarely admits defeat. So when they fail, I claim victory to shove it in their face. As I do now.

Also, thanks for proving you never bothered to read the article on a study that found the definition of sociopath and psychopath lacking, and useless to treatment.

Two wins, one laugh.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3641
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:The loser

Vastet wrote:
The loser rarely admits defeat. So when they fail, I claim victory to shove it in their face.

 

  Obviously you are over-compensating for some deficiency that you perceive within yourself.   Therefore you need to strut like a little rooster to restore your sense of worth.   That's okay, do what you need to do. I'm sure it's carthartic for you.

 

 

Vastet wrote:
 

  As I do now.

 

Yes, Vastet good boy, good boy !

 

Vastet wrote:
Also, thanks for proving you never bothered to read the article on a study that found the definition of sociopath and psychopath lacking, and useless to treatment.

 

  Actually Vastet I did read it.   I read the Bible also, but it was bullshit, too, lol.

 

Vastet wrote:
Two wins, one laugh.

 

  Yay, you get a star by your name !

 

 

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3641
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
             

 

 

            Anyway, if you can hurry up and finish your victory dance,  do you consider a lack of remorse to be a form of empathy ? 

 

      A lack of remorse is frequently listed as a defining characteristic of someone with Anti Social Personality Disorder.   Lack of remorse and empathy go together like peanut butter and turpentine.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10634
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Still laughing at an idiot

Still laughing at an idiot who won't stop self owning.

Please, continue to make an ass of yourself in the face of absolute failure.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

            Anyway, if you can hurry up and finish your victory dance,  do you consider a lack of remorse to be a form of empathy ? 

 

      A lack of remorse is frequently listed as a defining characteristic of someone with Anti Social Personality Disorder.   Lack of remorse and empathy go together like peanut butter and turpentine.

 

Enough with the pissing contest already, both of you. 

Yes, sociopaths often demonstrate a lack of remorse.  They also have a clear pattern of deception.  Therefore, I would like to know a lot more about the Norwegian psychologist and her studies before I could form any firm opinion.  It also means I would take what anyone professing to be diagnosed as sociopathic says - even anonymously on an internet forum - with a huge grain of salt.

Maybe the psychologist has been seriously mislead as well.

However. as I said before, warehousing someone for the rest of their life seems a waste - of time, money, resources, lives.  And I do not see why stepping back and reviewing our research and testing methods is not a good idea.  Deceiving oneself about one's emotions and motivations would not be out of character.  Telling yourself you don't care so that you respond to your abuser as if you are unaffected by the abuse is a not uncommon defense mechanism.

Reviewing the tests and treatments may help some people.  As long as they are careful to keep everyone safe - the sociopath, society, clinicians and health care workers - I don't have a problem with what is being done halfway around the world from me.  Some of our European friends may have more legitimate concerns about the work.

You and Vastet are both - pissing up the wrong tree.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
cj wrote:ProzacDeathWish

cj wrote:

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

            Anyway, if you can hurry up and finish your victory dance,  do you consider a lack of remorse to be a form of empathy ? 

 

      A lack of remorse is frequently listed as a defining characteristic of someone with Anti Social Personality Disorder.   Lack of remorse and empathy go together like peanut butter and turpentine.

 

Enough with the pissing contest already, both of you. 

Yes, sociopaths often demonstrate a lack of remorse.  They also have a clear pattern of deception.  Therefore, I would like to know a lot more about the Norwegian psychologist and her studies before I could form any firm opinion.  It also means I would take what anyone professing to be diagnosed as sociopathic says - even anonymously on an internet forum - with a huge grain of salt.

Maybe the psychologist has been seriously mislead as well.

However. as I said before, warehousing someone for the rest of their life seems a waste - of time, money, resources, lives.  And I do not see why stepping back and reviewing our research and testing methods is not a good idea.  Deceiving oneself about one's emotions and motivations would not be out of character.  Telling yourself you don't care so that you respond to your abuser as if you are unaffected by the abuse is a not uncommon defense mechanism.

Reviewing the tests and treatments may help some people.  As long as they are careful to keep everyone safe - the sociopath, society, clinicians and health care workers - I don't have a problem with what is being done halfway around the world from me.  Some of our European friends may have more legitimate concerns about the work.

You and Vastet are both - pissing up the wrong tree.

 

All very valid points.  A few notes however...

Firstly, while the article seems to underline the obvious, don't label any one individual.  It even states that not enough subjects have been studied for any conclusive findings.

Vaset's article wrote:

Gullhaugen says that she has not studied enough cases to draw any final conclusions about this, but that three other studies show the same tendency.

...when referring to nurture vs nature.
Also this study is particularly based on violent criminals, it could be that violent criminals, that also exhibit psychopathic behavior fit this profile, but this may not be true for nonviolent psychopaths....  
The article also makes some appeals to popularity with the Hannibal Lecter reference... all in all, I wouldn't base my next first degree murder defense on it.  

 

Secondly, while labeling individuals is wrong, labels are there for a reason, especially psychological disorder labels.  I'm quite confident that no credible psychologist would read the label psychopath, and believe the individual before him has the mentality of Hannibal Lecter.  I'm also quite confident that a credible psychologist would understand the varying degrees of illness.  But if said psychologist read the label PSYCHOPATH, he would understand that the individual exhibits some traits found under that label.  The most notable would be the lack of a conscience, and empathy.

Wiki has this to say about psychopaths

wiki wrote:

Psychopathy (/saɪˈkɒpəθi/[1][2] from the Ancient Greek ψυχή "psyche", -soul, mind and πάθος, "pathos" -suffering, disease, condition[3][4]) is a personality disorder that has been variously described as characterized by shallow emotions (in particular reduced fear), stress tolerance, lacking empathy, coldheartedness, lacking guilt, egocentricity, superficial charm, manipulativeness, irresponsibility, nonplanfulness, impulsivity, and antisocial behaviors such as parasitic lifestyle and criminality. There is no consensus about the symptom criteria and there are ongoing debates regarding issues such as essential features, causes, and the possibility of treatment.[5]

note how there is no definitive consensus on the definition, cause or anything other then the fact that some individuals show some traits more then others... 

Thirdly, there are no winners on a debate like this, but almost always, there are losers.  PDW presented a relevant definition, and centered on the lack of empathy.  Also, he mentioned that environment is not entirely responsible, here's what the article says about that:

Vaset's article wrote:

Gullhaugen reminds us that biology and environment mutually influence each other. The personality disorder that results can be seen as the sum total of a number of biological and psychological factors.

Lastly, when you represent this website in a semi official manner, such as the case with a "High level Mod" whatever that means.  One would be wise to show a little restraint, lest it reflect on its entirety.  I'm not saying you should walk on eggshells, but calling someone an idiot for bring up valid arguments against what you're saying, and then doing the whole "I win" thing... is not productive... Just saying. 

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10634
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
When I want your opinion,

When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you. I don't and have never represented any group anywhere. A moderator, by definition, enforces rules and regulations. Last I checked it wasn't against the rules to call someone an idiot even if they aren't being an idiot.

But PDW is being an idiot, and has presented no evidence to support his argument.

Until a peer review criticising this study has been presented, neither you nor he nor anyone else currently perusing this forum have anything with which to call it into question.

So go suck a dick. Smiling

Edit: I win. Just saying.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3641
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:But PDW is

Vastet wrote:
But PDW is being an idiot,

 

   ...what a classic response. 

 

Vastet wrote:
...and has presented no evidence to support his argument. Until a peer review criticising this study has been presented, neither you nor he nor anyone else currently perusing this forum have anything with which to call it into question.

 

  http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hare_Psychotherapy_Checklist      { edit: link won't go live.  Google search "Hare Psychotherapy Checklist" }

 

   ( see Factor 1: Personality "Aggressive narcissism"  bullet point number seven ( ie, Callousness; lack of empathy )

 

  

 

Vastet wrote:
So go suck a dick. Smiling Edit: I win. Just saying.

 

            I don't care about "winning",   accuracy will do just fine.

 

  

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:When I want

Vastet wrote:
When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you. I don't and have never represented any group anywhere. A moderator, by definition, enforces rules and regulations. Last I checked it wasn't against the rules to call someone an idiot even if they aren't being an idiot. But PDW is being an idiot, and has presented no evidence to support his argument. Until a peer review criticising this study has been presented, neither you nor he nor anyone else currently perusing this forum have anything with which to call it into question. So go suck a dick. Smiling Edit: I win. Just saying.

You display our typical amount of tact and intelligence Smiling.  I was more referring to class, rather then rules.  You will note that you have the right to be an asshole, and you have the right to be a stupid asshole.  But if you're a moderator, a newcomer to the site may believe that we're all stupid assholes because you are being one.  Just saying.  

Smiling 

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


Watcher
atheist
Posts: 2326
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
Rule number 4,673 of

Rule number 4,673 of internet debates:  If one party claims victory during the debate, the other party wins by default.

"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10634
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
^ Idiots think they have

^ Idiots think they have said anything of value, but they have not.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


tonyjeffers
tonyjeffers's picture
Posts: 482
Joined: 2012-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Watcher wrote:One time I was

Watcher wrote:

One time I was doing a search online relating to IQ and pedophilia and stumbled across a forum of self-proclaimed pedophiles.

Now these people weren't actually giving into their desires.  There was no talk of committing crimes or trading of child porn or anything like that.

These were just people who admitted they were sexually attracted mainly to little kids but realized that they could not act upon those innate desires.  And the forum consisted of both men and women.

Man, how bad would that suck?  Just like some people are naturally attracted to members of their own genders these people were naturally attracted to prepubescent children.

Unlike homosexuals though, these people couldn't organize a pedophile parade or fight in congress for the right to marry kindergartners.

You know though, everytime I've seen some 6' 6" tall dude married to a 4'11" flat chested woman I've kind of wondered what that was all about.  Maybe they were dealing with some form of pedophilia urges in the only legal way they could.

 

 

I had a friend of 30+ yrs who had/has a problem with that.  He wasn't the portrayed creepy guy either. hard worker and attractive to women. always made people laugh. He was also a heavy drinker. The combo (losing self-control) ended up really messing his life up. He had admitted things to me in the past that I didn't take serious enough cuz he was always talking crazy in funny ways.  But a few times he told me about looking at girls way too young but said it an a semi-joking way. Well I finally took him seriously when he told me that when we were at a friends house he sniffed the 10 yr old daughter's underwear in the bathroom hamper. I gave heads up to the Dad and  a couple friends with young girls but they  sluffed it off.

I stopped hanging out with him for other reasons, then later found out he got caught with a 12 yr old girl down the road.  He did some time, shamed and shunned by the whole town. One other girl's name came up alleged.

Now that I look back, I think he was confiding in me and was his way of seeking council in a friend.  I guess i failed.  I wonder if a forum like that would have helped- hopefully not encouraged. He never would have willingly went to a shrink.

Some possibly interesting and maybe relevant traits:

Borderline psycho tendencies- animal abuse as a kid

short-man syndrome- always over- competitive, bully to the smaller and weaker,

jealous and vindictive

Strict christian up-bringing

Deep seated hate for his abusive mother

He was always very posessive of me as a friend. Drove away others male and female

Later I realized a really creepy thing tho. He had always made it his business to try and mentor younger kids ( usually boys) and even said he always wanted to be a child psychiatrist.  Yeah he's got some problems.

It's frustrating tho cuz most of the time he's the kind of guy who would give you his last dollar and would jump right up to do anyone a favor- even a stranger

He still lives just down the road and has tried get back to being my friend.  I've had to be stern with him and tell him to leave me alone. And it's not just because of his problem. I can't help but to feel a little sorry fro him cuz no one wants to be around him.

I'm really surprised he hasn't gone over the edge been locked in a padded room. He's too insecure to be alone.

What do we do with these kinda people? 

"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:^ Idiots think

Vastet wrote:
^ Idiots think they have said anything of value, but they have not.

Really? this is your counter argument? 

I think we need to review this whole thread.  

First of all, there is no argument you're arguing against your own lack of comprehension.  You've mentioned in the OP that :

OP wrote:

It has annoyed me that psychopathy was so poorly understood. Psychopaths are referred to as having few or no emotions compared to "normal" people. I always knew it was bullshit. Finally, someone agrees with me, and has started to prove just how wrong the way we look at psychopaths is.


aside from the fact that most people have more tangible annoyances, I don't think anyone here is arguing that psychopaths have no emotions.  They may have more/less or the same amount.  What PDW and myself (and other individuals that are not retarded) are trying to say is that psychopaths lack empathy, not emotions.  Empathy is the ability to understand emotions in others.

The article doesn't mention much about empathy, it touches mostly on nature vs nurture debate, which is nothing new in psychology.  It doesn't even argue that psychopaths are psychopaths.  It simply states that if nurture is mostly to blame for the current psychological state of an individual, treatments can be devised to address that.  

Everyone here is in complete agreement with the article.  Personally I hold the belief that most, if not all psychological illnesses are due to a combination of nature/nurture.  

Furthermore, you will have to continue being annoyed, because if anything, this article adds to the ambiguity of the condition rather then clarify it.  I'm not even sure wtf your point is. 

If you look up the definition of an idiot, it will come up as someone that acts in a self defeating manner.  I think you need to take a good hard look in the mirror.  

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Ktulu wrote:aside from the

Ktulu wrote:

aside from the fact that most people have more tangible annoyances, I don't think anyone here is arguing that psychopaths have no emotions.  They may have more/less or the same amount.  What PDW and myself (and other individuals that are not retarded) are trying to say is that psychopaths lack empathy, not emotions.  Empathy is the ability to understand emotions in others.

Which is a really interesting question that probably can not be answered here. How does one feel strong emotion and lack empathy at the same time ? For instance, psychopaths get married I know, so how would you have a relationship or a significant other without any sort of empathy for the feelings of the other ? Are they merely using a significant other for selfish reasons and that is it ?

This is hard for me to comprehend. I can understand a person having powerful emotions, only if it pertains to themselves ( but couldn't that just be simple narcissim?). But not how a person could function with a complete lack of empathy.

For instance, hitman Richard Kuklinski, that killed over one hundred people for the Mafia, when being interviewed on tv, seemed real unemotional about killing and such, but when his children were brought up, he began talking about how much he loved his children and how he would do anything to anyone for them. Could this be a type of empathy ?

Of course, I have read that psychopaths are good at mimicking proper emotion for their own ends, so that opens a whole new set of questions. If psychopaths are known to be habitual liars ( a common trait, according to what I have read) then how would we really KNOW ? Perhaps they get married and pretend to love their children, only because they know they are supposed to ?

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster wrote:Ktulu

harleysportster wrote:

Ktulu wrote:

aside from the fact that most people have more tangible annoyances, I don't think anyone here is arguing that psychopaths have no emotions.  They may have more/less or the same amount.  What PDW and myself (and other individuals that are not retarded) are trying to say is that psychopaths lack empathy, not emotions.  Empathy is the ability to understand emotions in others.

Which is a really interesting question that probably can not be answered here. How does one feel strong emotion and lack empathy at the same time ? For instance, psychopaths get married I know, so how would you have a relationship or a significant other without any sort of empathy for the feelings of the other ? Are they merely using a significant other for selfish reasons and that is it ?

This is hard for me to comprehend. I can understand a person having powerful emotions, only if it pertains to themselves ( but couldn't that just be simple narcissim?). But not how a person could function with a complete lack of empathy.

For instance, hitman Richard Kuklinski, that killed over one hundred people for the Mafia, when being interviewed on tv, seemed real unemotional about killing and such, but when his children were brought up, he began talking about how much he loved his children and how he would do anything to anyone for them. Could this be a type of empathy ?

Of course, I have read that psychopaths are good at mimicking proper emotion for their own ends, so that opens a whole new set of questions. If psychopaths are known to be habitual liars ( a common trait, according to what I have read) then how would we really KNOW ? Perhaps they get married and pretend to love their children, only because they know they are supposed to ?

Very good and interesting points Smiling

I don't think anyone completely lacks empathy, 100%.  I think it's more of a varying degrees of how affected they are.  I'm sure we rationalize and give in to emotions on regular basis.  A psychopath would be more inclined to rationalize, and, much like an autistic individual would have difficulty readying facial expressions, they would have a difficult time interpreting emotions.  

They may condition themselves, or learn what emotions mean, but likely they lack or are deficient concerning the mirror neurons necessary to instinctually understand them.  

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


ThunderJones
atheist
ThunderJones's picture
Posts: 433
Joined: 2012-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:^ Idiots think

Vastet wrote:
^ Idiots think they have said anything of value, but they have not.

I have to agree with Ktulu. Insults without any rational argument just makes you look bad. Something I expect out of the many Theistards that come here not a veteran moderator. No one is asking you to be perfect but you have to admit you are part of this forum's public face, and petty insults towards someone attempting honest discussion (Ktulu, and CJ atleast, I dont wanna take sides on the 'pissing contest' as CJ put it) is beneath you.

Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Ktulu wrote:I don't think

Ktulu wrote:

I don't think anyone completely lacks empathy, 100%.  I think it's more of a varying degrees of how affected they are.  I'm sure we rationalize and give in to emotions on regular basis.  A psychopath would be more inclined to rationalize, and, much like an autistic individual would have difficulty readying facial expressions, they would have a difficult time interpreting emotions.  

They may condition themselves, or learn what emotions mean, but likely they lack or are deficient concerning the mirror neurons necessary to instinctually understand them.  

I guess there is no way of really knowing without actually being in the mind of a psychopath. I mean, the popular meme that automatically leaps into a lot of people's minds when they hear the word "psychopath" is some sort of deranged killer or amoral manipulator that does anything to get his own way.

But, what could we say about psychopaths out there that may never have committed any crimes, tortured animals, abused people or done anything to make anyone aware of that part of themselves ? Assuming they exist. Of course, I would wonder if someone that lacks certain elements would be aware of it. How can I comprehend an emotion or thought that I have never experienced or had some relation to ?

Of course, as I have mentioned before, I have read that psychopaths are gifted at "pretending" to have the right responses and emotions, while maybe experiencing nothing. Which would indicate that they would have to be aware on some level, or they would not feel the need to mimic or habitually lie.

But that is just speculation on my part. I don't think there would be any way of truly knowing,unless one was one. But then we are back to the habitual liar dilemma.

This reminds me of that old story ( can't remember where it originated) but some dude from a village told an outsider " Everything that everyone says in that village is a lie" (paraphrasing). BUT, if everything they said is a lie, then to say that everything that they say is a lie would also be a lie, but that could not be a lie, because of----" (Well, you get the idea).

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10634
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Ktulu wrote:Really? this is

Ktulu wrote:
Really? this is your counter argument? 

There must be an argument before there can be a counter argument. So far all I see is a bunch of ignorant idiots making claims based on old information which has been called into question by new information. Yet none of said ignorant idiots have yet to post or make a single critical peer review of the study.

Until someone does, I'm laughing at all of you.

It's as if the science community where the ones to condemn Gallileo, because the books written before all said the Earth was the centre of the universe without even bothering to look into and test his claims.

And you fools claim to be rational. Lmfao.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ThunderJones
atheist
ThunderJones's picture
Posts: 433
Joined: 2012-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Ktulu

Vastet wrote:
Ktulu wrote:
Really? this is your counter argument? 
There must be an argument before there can be a counter argument. So far all I see is a bunch of ignorant idiots making claims based on old information which has been called into question by new information. Yet none of said ignorant idiots have yet to post or make a single critical peer review of the study. Until someone does, I'm laughing at all of you. It's as if the science community where the ones to condemn Gallileo, because the books written before all said the Earth was the centre of the universe without even bothering to look into and test his claims. And you fools claim to be rational. Lmfao.

It seemed to me that they said this study agreed with their intuition and they think it has promise. Even the article itself says it is not proof of anything until more testing can be done.

Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10634
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
ThunderJones wrote:Vastet

ThunderJones wrote:

Vastet wrote:
^ Idiots think they have said anything of value, but they have not.

I have to agree with Ktulu. Insults without any rational argument just makes you look bad. Something I expect out of the many Theistards that come here not a veteran moderator. No one is asking you to be perfect but you have to admit you are part of this forum's public face, and petty insults towards someone attempting honest discussion (Ktulu, and CJ atleast, I dont wanna take sides on the 'pissing contest' as CJ put it) is beneath you.

Ktulu is not interested in a real discussion, he's an asshat troll who takes jabs at me whenever he can, and has done so for far longer than I've been a mod. In case you haven't learned yet, I don't give a fuck what you or anyone else thinks of me, and I will return trolling with better trolling, logic, and accuracy of information.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10634
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
ThunderJones wrote:It seemed

ThunderJones wrote:
It seemed to me that they said this study agreed with their intuition and they think it has promise.

Funny. We must be reading different threads. Let me bring you to the one I'm reading.

"They do not lack emotions, they lack empathy."

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ThunderJones
atheist
ThunderJones's picture
Posts: 433
Joined: 2012-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:ThunderJones

Vastet wrote:
ThunderJones wrote:

Vastet wrote:
^ Idiots think they have said anything of value, but they have not.

I have to agree with Ktulu. Insults without any rational argument just makes you look bad. Something I expect out of the many Theistards that come here not a veteran moderator. No one is asking you to be perfect but you have to admit you are part of this forum's public face, and petty insults towards someone attempting honest discussion (Ktulu, and CJ atleast, I dont wanna take sides on the 'pissing contest' as CJ put it) is beneath you.

Ktulu is not interested in a real discussion, he's an asshat troll who takes jabs at me whenever he can, and has done so for far longer than I've been a mod. In case you haven't learned yet, I don't give a fuck what you or anyone else thinks of me, and I will return trolling with better trolling, logic, and accuracy of information.

Well I haven't been around very long so I don't know anything really about Ktulu, but atleast in this specific instance he/she doesn't really seem to be trolling. Maybe they have serious flaws in their argument, but how does it help to just dismiss and insult them? It is totally fine if you do not care what I think but it's not really nessecary to be combative and hostile is it?

Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker


ThunderJones
atheist
ThunderJones's picture
Posts: 433
Joined: 2012-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:ThunderJones

Vastet wrote:
ThunderJones wrote:
It seemed to me that they said this study agreed with their intuition and they think it has promise.
Funny. We must be reading different threads. Let me bring you to the one I'm reading. "They do not lack emotions, they lack empathy."

Well then, why don't you show them the error of their ways? Isn't that what this forum is for? Just insulting them doesn't help anything. If you aren't going to add to discussion then what's the point of posting?

Please understand I'm not trying to attack you personally.

Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker


Watcher
atheist
Posts: 2326
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
ThunderJones wrote:Well I

ThunderJones wrote:

Well I haven't been around very long so I don't know anything really about Ktulu, but atleast in this specific instance he/she doesn't really seem to be trolling. Maybe they have serious flaws in their argument, but how does it help to just dismiss and insult them? It is totally fine if you do not care what I think but it's not really nessecary to be combative and hostile is it?

Well, not to toss any more wood on the conflagaration, but...Vastet does this sort of thing.

He'll claim that the other person is not providing anything but personal opinions, claim victory, and then do the "^morons think I give a crap" thing.   I've seen him do it numerous times.

"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Watcher wrote:ThunderJones

Watcher wrote:

ThunderJones wrote:

Well I haven't been around very long so I don't know anything really about Ktulu, but atleast in this specific instance he/she doesn't really seem to be trolling. Maybe they have serious flaws in their argument, but how does it help to just dismiss and insult them? It is totally fine if you do not care what I think but it's not really nessecary to be combative and hostile is it?

Well, not to toss any more wood on the conflagaration, but...Vastet does this sort of thing.

He'll claim that the other person is not providing anything but personal opinions, claim victory, and then do the "^morons think I give a crap" thing.   I've seen him do it numerous times.

Yup, I have in the past disagreed with Vaset, and that pretty much is the definition of a troll in his book.  I would love for him to post the link of ONE single instance where I was trolling.  I will then concede the point.  If he cannot provide ONE example of me trolling, then he's a liar.  

"em·pa·thy   [em-puh-thee]  Show IPA

noun

the intellectual identification with or vicarious experiencing of the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of another."

I will repeat, because some of us have very poor reading comprehension.  Even in the most famous example of a psychopath, Hannibal Lecter, he often experiences emotions.  What he lacks is empathy.  Now, English is not my first language, but even I can understand the difference between empathy and emotion.  

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Ktulu

Vastet wrote:
Ktulu wrote:
Really? this is your counter argument? 
There must be an argument before there can be a counter argument. So far all I see is a bunch of ignorant idiots making claims based on old information which has been called into question by new information. Yet none of said ignorant idiots have yet to post or make a single critical peer review of the study. Until someone does, I'm laughing at all of you. It's as if the science community where the ones to condemn Gallileo, because the books written before all said the Earth was the centre of the universe without even bothering to look into and test his claims. And you fools claim to be rational. Lmfao.

I'm not questioning the article, I'm questioning your reading comprehension.  You will note that I posted quotes from the article to support my post.  I don't see how this is trolling.  

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
 My understanding is, that

 My understanding is, that psychopaths may be harmless and productive members of the society, unless you let them near a Wall Street stock market computer. Then they may ruin a few dozen third world countries by manipulating with basic commodity prices.

Anyway, there are other personality disorders that negatively affect empathy (like autism spectrum) or remove emotions (defensive traumatic reactions). I'd like to understand what is the difference between such a person and a real psychopath.

The childhood abuse is certainly a difference, it makes me think that some psychopaths are NT. The lack of empathy or Wall Street syndrome must be genetic.

I wonder what kind of a role plays the desire to understand, to get along, to interact socially, to discover and develop empathy, in an otherwise socially disabled individual. Perhaps true psychopaths, whether they can or can't, they are complacent with their state and don't want to change themselves? I suppose the deciding point comes when the individual becomes aware of his condition. But this is diffcult, it requires a professional help and how much socially aware can you get with real psychopaths anyway? 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote: Anyway,

Luminon wrote:

 Anyway, there are other personality disorders that negatively affect empathy (like autism spectrum) or remove emotions (defensive traumatic reactions). I'd like to understand what is the difference between such a person and a real psychopath.

I am glad that you brought this up, Luminon. I was having an interesting discussion with someone about this the other day and was wondering. Are there actual people out there that are devoid of emotions ? Is there a psychological condition other than some sort of disorder in the brain that can cause that ? Is there something possibly unrelated to a traumatic incident that could create a person to be devoid of emotion ? I have read articles about people suffering injuries that caused them to lose emotions, but other than that, do not have any other relevant information. Do you know by any chance ?

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster

harleysportster wrote:

Luminon wrote:

 Anyway, there are other personality disorders that negatively affect empathy (like autism spectrum) or remove emotions (defensive traumatic reactions). I'd like to understand what is the difference between such a person and a real psychopath.

I am glad that you brought this up, Luminon. I was having an interesting discussion with someone about this the other day and was wondering. Are there actual people out there that are devoid of emotions ? Is there a psychological condition other than some sort of disorder in the brain that can cause that ? Is there something possibly unrelated to a traumatic incident that could create a person to be devoid of emotion ? I have read articles about people suffering injuries that caused them to lose emotions, but other than that, do not have any other relevant information. Do you know by any chance ?

Actually, I was largely devoid of emotions for years. It started as a survival reaction during tough times at school and it kind of stuck. I practically forgot there were any emotions missing! You know, the less emotions we have, the less the outer world and society makes sense. But I still made sense subjectively. Only I got several well-meaning hints from people about my supposed coldness (wtf?) and also it seemed to me that something is missing, that there is a blind area into which I can not see. Well, an aspiring guy that I am, I did a lot of meditation, introspection and (woo) therapies and eventually the realization came. Man, was I ever surprised. I saw myself for what I really was and it was really not a nice sight. I wouldn't wish that to anyone. It was like when Dorian Gray would see his portrait. I was permanently shocked for a whole week, freaked out to the point of some very dark and absurd humor. 

Well, that wasn't an end to the various future surprises, so I might sometimes come across as a somewhat psycho from all these deaths and rebuilds of my social worldview and self-image. Specially when planets transit over my Lilith or Chiron, like right now.
But recently I realized I have the Asperger's syndrome. If anyone has the birthright to trouble with (managing, realizing, comprehending, displaying, reading) emotions and relationships, and a huge extra dose of stress and trauma due to social misunderstanding, it's me. 

My theory is, well, it is crap. I can not make a clear distinction between myself and actual evil-doing psychopaths. Except for the childhood abuse, it's not really clear why some non-NT people are dangerous psychopaths and some not. I just know I always played the good guys in RPGs and never killed anyone in a PvP. Harmonious upbringing is probably the cause, plus some idealism and maybe a higher IQ. And maybe the countless spiritual literature I've read over the years. I am sure that someone with a worse upbringing would easily snap in some bad situation and end up in jail or diagnostic institute.

But I must say, once again I prove EXC wrong, my trusting and truthful nature isn't from too much oxytocin. Actually, AS causes a lack of oxytocin (in 10 years they'll approve it as a nose spray) and also both right hemisphere deficiency and lack of will to keep track of the social bullshittery like lies, white lies, half truths, hidden agendas and emperor's invisible clothes. OTOH, once realized, this deficiency made me quite interested in studying all things social and psychologic, hoping to gain a superior insight to fix the society's ills. This might be my calling in this incarnation.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3641
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:in case you

Vastet wrote:
in case you haven't learned yet, I don't give a fuck what you or anyone else thinks of me, and I will return trolling with better trolling, logic, and accuracy of information

 

    Vastet is the new MattShizzle.  The proof will be in his next post.  

 

    

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4512
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Ktulu wrote: If he cannot

Ktulu wrote:

 If he cannot provide ONE example of me trolling, then he's a liar.  

 

 

Ktulu wrote:

Oh, I love when daytime tv sci-fi drama reaches theist levels.  Time travel paradox meets bible thumping.  Let's see what gem this match made in heaven, has come up with.  

You have the ability to see the future.  You see that GOD'S plan for your future seeing ass, is to die mountain climbing.  You move to the Canadian prairies, and die of old age... TAM TAM DAMMMMMMMM!  You have just fucked god's plan, so your ass is going to hell.  Simultaneously, you are the proud pet owner of one live Schrodinger's cat, the dead one rotting away in the universe where your ass falls off a mountain.  But... here's the plot twister... in the universe where you fall off the mountain, your ass goes to heaven.  TAM TAM TAMMMMMMMM!!!!.  And a second plot twister... the soul is one, so now you have a soul in hell, and one in heaven... and that just created a pseudo scientific, all religious paradox.... And that just ruins god's morning, I mean wtf? he was just about to reach for the cream cheese to get on his toast... and there you go fucking up god's breakfast.... that's just fucking rude.... End Credits...!!!

 

I think you should stick to bible quotes.  How was your vacation?  Did you have fun praying and going to church and stuff?

 

Well that post was pretty close to trolling. Of course, it was provoked in response to theist trolling and also LMAO funny. I don't think I have ever seen you troll anyone making an attempt at serious discussion. 

I just usually go with my own taste. If I like something, and it happens to be against the law, well, then I might have a problem.- Hunter S. Thompson


Watcher
atheist
Posts: 2326
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:Vastet

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

Vastet is the new MattShizzle.  The proof will be in his next post.  

Oh FUCK!   BUUUUURNNNN.....

That's just wrong.  haha

"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Ktulu

Beyond Saving wrote:

Ktulu wrote:

 If he cannot provide ONE example of me trolling, then he's a liar.  

 

 

Ktulu wrote:

Oh, I love when daytime tv sci-fi drama reaches theist levels.  Time travel paradox meets bible thumping.  Let's see what gem this match made in heaven, has come up with.  

You have the ability to see the future.  You see that GOD'S plan for your future seeing ass, is to die mountain climbing.  You move to the Canadian prairies, and die of old age... TAM TAM DAMMMMMMMM!  You have just fucked god's plan, so your ass is going to hell.  Simultaneously, you are the proud pet owner of one live Schrodinger's cat, the dead one rotting away in the universe where your ass falls off a mountain.  But... here's the plot twister... in the universe where you fall off the mountain, your ass goes to heaven.  TAM TAM TAMMMMMMMM!!!!.  And a second plot twister... the soul is one, so now you have a soul in hell, and one in heaven... and that just created a pseudo scientific, all religious paradox.... And that just ruins god's morning, I mean wtf? he was just about to reach for the cream cheese to get on his toast... and there you go fucking up god's breakfast.... that's just fucking rude.... End Credits...!!!

 

I think you should stick to bible quotes.  How was your vacation?  Did you have fun praying and going to church and stuff?

 

 

Well that post was pretty close to trolling. Of course, it was provoked in response to theist trolling and also LMAO funny. I don't think I have ever seen you troll anyone making an attempt at serious discussion. 

Smiling good find.  That was an attempt at levity to point out the ridiculousness of his previous claim.  I consider trolling to be completely non conductive to the discussion at hand.  I thought that moved the discussion along more then his whole previous points put together.  Also, by that point I gathered he was not there to discuss anything.  I usually revert to my smug atheist asshole persona in those situations, lest I disappoint.

"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." Thomas Jefferson.

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Ktulu

Beyond Saving wrote:

Ktulu wrote:

 If he cannot provide ONE example of me trolling, then he's a liar.  

 

 

Ktulu wrote:

Oh, I love when daytime tv sci-fi drama reaches theist levels.  Time travel paradox meets bible thumping.  Let's see what gem this match made in heaven, has come up with.  

You have the ability to see the future.  You see that GOD'S plan for your future seeing ass, is to die mountain climbing.  You move to the Canadian prairies, and die of old age... TAM TAM DAMMMMMMMM!  You have just fucked god's plan, so your ass is going to hell.  Simultaneously, you are the proud pet owner of one live Schrodinger's cat, the dead one rotting away in the universe where your ass falls off a mountain.  But... here's the plot twister... in the universe where you fall off the mountain, your ass goes to heaven.  TAM TAM TAMMMMMMMM!!!!.  And a second plot twister... the soul is one, so now you have a soul in hell, and one in heaven... and that just created a pseudo scientific, all religious paradox.... And that just ruins god's morning, I mean wtf? he was just about to reach for the cream cheese to get on his toast... and there you go fucking up god's breakfast.... that's just fucking rude.... End Credits...!!!

 

I think you should stick to bible quotes.  How was your vacation?  Did you have fun praying and going to church and stuff?

 

 

Well that post was pretty close to trolling. Of course, it was provoked in response to theist trolling and also LMAO funny. I don't think I have ever seen you troll anyone making an attempt at serious discussion. 

Smiling good find.  That was an attempt at levity to point out the ridiculousness of his previous claim.  I consider trolling to be completely non conductive to the discussion at hand.  I thought that moved the discussion along more then his whole previous points put together.  Also, by that point I gathered he was not there to discuss anything.  I usually revert to my smug atheist asshole persona in those situations, lest I disappoint.

"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." Thomas Jefferson.

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10634
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
When those I'm arguing with

When those I'm arguing with are arguing exactly like theists, they deserve such responses. Case in point: This thread. Even up to now, not one person has provided a single shred of evidence to question the findings of the article, yet have dismissed it without question. It is not an insult to point out an idiot is an idiot, it's a statement of fact.

Clearly only a couple people have any interest in having an intelligent discussion, and should they respond I may. Until then the asshats can have the thread. Enjoy being ignorant fucks.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.