Law School Discussion

Law Students => Current Law Students => Topic started by: tencigars on May 30, 2005, 10:19:54 AM

Title: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: tencigars on May 30, 2005, 10:19:54 AM
Chances are you know several psychopaths.  You sit or sat next to them in your classes.  You work or will work with them in your practice.

In The Sociopath Next Door: The Ruthless Versus the Rest of Us, Harvard professor Martha Stout says that "one in twenty-five of us has no conscience and can do absolutely anything at all without feeling guilty.

Contrary to popular misconception, though a large percentage of murders and rapes are committed by sociopaths, most sociopaths don't commit such crimes.  Most are ostensibly law abiding--because of the legal and social sanctions. A high percentage of them are very smart (often charming too). And a majority of them are strongly attracted to power and so seek professions and authority positions with influence over others--without a desire for the actual responsibility, of course.

When stepping on others benefits them a small amount and costs them nothing, they don't hesitate. Worse, when they can get away with it without repercussion, they make others jump or suffer simply for the sensation of power. (Why not? The harm they cause others doesn't trouble them.)

4% of the population. 1 in 25. More in law than other fields. Pretty shocking, eh? Makes you wonder about those around you doesn't it? As well it should, because that 4% is responsible for a disproportionate share of the needless, intentionally inflicted or callously tolerated, pain and suffering in the world.

The disorder arises in part because of genetics and in part as a result of nurture.  The most popular theory is that it arises from an early attachment disorder.  It's an odd and sad fact that orphaned babies in hospitals die if not handled.  Insufficient physical contact and affectionate/responsive care of a baby's needs inhibits development of certain human qualities--apparently conscience is one of them.

By the way, I would like to stray further from the law and interject here that I think the modern western practice of housing a baby in a separate room and ignoring its cries (a practice only common in a recent fraction of human existence, and still not common practice in most of the world--where sleeping with the baby is still the norm), though endorsed by some modern doctors peddling new parenting concepts such as "teaching the baby to self-soothe" (read: facillitating parent rationalization) is very harmful.  Not only does it cause the baby very real and unnecessary anxiety (throughout evolution abandoned babies were at risk to predators, etc.) and create a lack of trust in their parents, it stunts their development.  Just because lots of other people you know are now isolating their children doesn't mean it's best or even right.  Similarly, the very recent practice of sending babies and toddlers to day care is, though prevalent and in the cases of working mothers often necessary, usually a poor substitute for traditional mother/home care, and may be detrimental.

---------------------
Note: Sociopathy and psychopathy are synomyms. Modernly, the APA terms it a personality disorder: the Antisocial Personality Disorder.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: dujour on May 30, 2005, 04:52:58 PM
There's a teacher in my school that is rumored to have been a heroin addict in the past .. your typical psychopathic personality case ... they say the herd instinct is obliterated by heroin, and the herd instincts are the ones which control the moral sense ... that professor has an unbeliavable sense of entitlement (despite being sick) and a complete lack of morals
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: danlauer on June 03, 2005, 02:00:59 AM
... they say the herd instinct is obliterated by heroin, and the herd instincts are the ones which control the moral sense ...

Morality is herd instinct in the individual.
Friedrich Nietzsche, German philosopher (1844 - 1900), The Gay Science, section 116
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: tencigars on June 06, 2005, 07:16:18 AM
... they say the herd instinct is obliterated by heroin, and the herd instincts are the ones which control the moral sense ...

Morality is herd instinct in the individual.
Friedrich Nietzsche, German philosopher (1844 - 1900), The Gay Science, section 116

Humans evolved in small interconnected groups.  Survival of the individual was dependent on cooperation.  Group prosperity benefited individuals, even determined their survival.  Thus, other-regarding morality benefited the individual.
Title: The serial bully
Post by: thevalidator on June 07, 2005, 04:23:52 AM
How about an Attention-Seeker plus The Wannabe plus The Guru AND The Sociopath?
Title: STUDENTS LEAVE LAW SCHOOL WITH FRAGILE MENTAL HEALTH
Post by: landauer on June 11, 2005, 06:08:18 PM
By Jaime Levy Pessin

At a recent conference at the Hyatt Regency Chicago, two presenters started their seminar with some depressing statistics: Lawyers, they said, have extraordinarily high levels of depression, anxiety, stress-related illness, substance-abuse problems and various other mental maladies that might come as no surprise to people who work long hours in an often confrontational job. What's surprising, though, is that the presenters at the National Association for Law Placement convention -- a law professor and a psychologist who acts as a "life coach" for lawyers -- say the problem doesn't start in the grueling work environments. Instead, they said, law schools are pumping out lawyers who come into their careers with depression already taking root and with their priorities out of whack.

In an article published in 2004 in Behavioral Sciences and the Law, Florida State University Law Professor Lawrence S. Krieger, one of the NALP presenters, outlined findings from a study he conducted of 235 FSU law students and 255 students at an unnamed Midwestern law school. Over the course of law school, he found, students' overall well-being went down by 75 percent. Their life satisfaction decreased 58 percent. Depression rose 63 percent, hostility went up 59 percent and obsessive-compulsive behavior increased by 61 percent.

To conduct the study, researchers gave the students an "attitudes and values" survey on their first day of law school. The same students were given three follow-up questionnaires as they continued through law school; the last survey was conducted in November of their third year. In the surveys, students were asked to rate how much in the last month or so they'd experienced certain moods, how well certain statements characterized their lives and also whether they'd had certain physical ailments. The questions were crafted to put a numerical value on the students' moods.

The survey also included questions meant to assess why and how students were motivated: They were asked to write down five law school-related goals and to rate why they were pursuing each goal -- for example, "because of the enjoyment and stimulation that this activity provides you" or "because you would feel ashamed, guilty or anxious if you didn't." Also, they were asked how important it was to have certain things happen in their lives, from having expensive possessions to helping other people improve their lives. Numbers were also attached to these motivations to allow the researchers to track them over time. Finally, they ranked their first, second and third choices from a list of 15 career preferences that included four service jobs and four jobs deemed money-oriented. In selecting those career options, the students were asked to assume that any college loan obligations would be taken care of by their career choices; that way, Krieger said, their choices would reflect their genuine preferences, not their concerns about paying off debt.

The major indicator of what appeared to happen to students during law school, Krieger said, is how their motivations changed. Drawing on work in the field of psychology, Krieger explained that "intrinsic" values and motivations -- such as doing something because a person enjoys it, or because a person wants to develop himself or help the community -- generally lead to satisfaction. "Extrinsic" values and motivations, such as grades, prestige, status or the desire to impress others, can often lead to burnout and disillusionment. Among the law students he studied, intrinsic motivation went down 71 percent by the time they were seeking their first jobs, replaced by extrinsic values and motivations.

In other words, Krieger said, before even starting to practice, law students begin to do things for what psychological theory considers the wrong reasons. "A lot of people say, 'Well, that's who comes to law school. They're already messed up. Who would come except super-competitive Type A's?' " Krieger said at his seminar. In truth, he said, "They came in bright, happy, ready to make a difference. They left depressed, discouraged, wanting to make money and wanting to put their self-esteem back together." Or, in the words of one law student: "I've seen many people go from the highest motivation to sinking so low, so dejected, that they're not even wanting to practice law," said Deepti Sahrawat, a third-year at Chicago-Kent College of Law. She came to law school hoping to do human rights work, but now is aiming for a litigation job, a field she has found enjoyable when she's worked in it. Still, she said: "I did have grandiose notions of what I wanted to do with the law, but those don't exist anymore."

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: landauer on June 11, 2005, 06:09:35 PM
What they don't tell you

On a recent Tuesday during exam week at Chicago-Kent, Sahrawat and three of her classmates gathered in the school's lobby after they finished their remedies exam. All were in their third year at law school; only one had a job lined up for after graduation. Joseph Green, who will move to Washington, D.C., after graduation to take a job with an intellectual property firm, said law school was necessarily a competitive environment. "You know you're on a curve, competing against everyone around you," he said. "You want to further your cause, and not anyone else's. "I'm not training to work in a fast-food restaurant," he continued. "I'm training to go into a field where there's stress and competition... You need to know what that feels like."

Others, though, felt law school had a more dismal effect on them. "I walked into this place knowing I wasn't going to be a law review student," said Chris Fischer, 45, who has wanted to be a lawyer since she was five years old. She's hoping to land a job as a public defender. "The toughest lesson in the world is to know that sometimes your best isn't good enough. "I have nowhere near the level of hope that I had when I first started," she said. "That's not to say I regret my experience or have changed my plans. I think 'resigned' is the word." Nearly 30 years after Scott Turow published One L, the chronicle of his arduous journey through the first year of Harvard Law School, it seems only a handful of things have changed about the sometimes unhealthy pressures students face in law schools.

"Law school does its best to promote those feelings," Turow, a litigation partner in Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal, said in a recent interview. "There's one exam at the end of the year: That's the best possible way to increase student anxiety." Turow's not the only one who's noticed. Sharon Dolovich, now a law professor at UCLA, wrote a note for the Harvard Law Review in 1998, while she was a student there. In it, she described how the entire structure of law school -- from posting the list of those who make law review to teaching that it's necessary to argue both sides of a point, regardless of one's personal opinion -- works to destabilize students. "Graduates are by no means broken, but their sense of agency has been sorely undermined," she wrote in her Harvard Law Review note. "In general, they no longer view themselves as capable of having an impact on the world, much less setting it on fire."

Her experience as a professor hasn't changed her perception of that process. "Every semester, I ask students in my ethics class to write short reflective papers; I ask them to reflect on their experiences with legal education," she said. "I am always struck by how many papers reflect the same experiences I had... I don't know if it's as intense, because UCLA is a happier place than Harvard, but many people are experiencing these feelings very strongly." Administrators, professors and students agree law schools' grading curves and minimum GPAs can create intense competition among students, who say they get barely any feedback from professors along the way. The result can be demoralizing and lays the groundwork for the mental-health problems that students are exhibiting.

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: landauer on June 11, 2005, 06:10:15 PM
Another point worth noting: Ellen Ostrow, the psychologist who presented with Krieger at the NALP conference, referred to a study rating the optimism and pessimism levels found in various groups of people -- athletes, salespeople, insurance agents. In most groups, optimism correlated to success. But the opposite was true for law students. "One of the things you learn in law school is that to not foresee the risk ... makes you a bad lawyer," Ostrow said. "The last thing you'd want is someone representing you who wasn't going to look for loopholes in the contract before you sign it." But, she continued, "Making unemotional, rational analysis of things is a tool. It shouldn't be a way of life." Legal education, and eventually legal practice, doesn't necessarily make that distinction, and that can undermine law students' and lawyers' mental health.

It's not just students at the most elite law schools feeling the pressure: At FSU, which is ranked 56th in US News & World Report's 2006 law school listings, "the students say their experience is similar, except there's no guarantee of a high-paying job," Krieger said. The students at Chicago-Kent agreed. "Law school just dejects you," said Sahrawat, 29, who was a consultant before attending law school. "You put in a lot of work. When it pays off, it's great, but when it doesn't pay off, it's gut-wrenchingly awful."

Sowing the seeds

Although there's no research that shows directly that law students' depression spills over into their practices, there is evidence that lawyers are grappling with the same sorts of mental health issues. A Johns Hopkins study in 1990 showed that lawyers suffered from major depressive disorder at a rate more than three times higher than non-lawyers who shared their key sociodemographic traits. The same year, a study of Washington state lawyers showed that 18 percent of them were "problem drinkers," more than twice the alcohol abuse rates for adults in the United States. In 1991, a study of North Carolina lawyers showed that more than 25 percent of them experienced physical symptoms of extreme anxiety at least three times per month. "Most legal workplaces don't talk about this because it's touchy-feely," Ostrow said. "But we're talking about retention, productivity and lower health-care costs."

Law school administrators don't deny that some of their schools' institutional hardships can put immense pressure on their students and cause depression, low self-esteem and the other kinds of demoralization that Krieger identified. "We get students who tended to be outstanding performers," said Stephen Sowle, Chicago-Kent's assistant dean for academic administration and student affairs. "All of a sudden, some portion of the group is necessarily getting grades they've never gotten before. It leads to anger, self-doubt." Cliff Zimmerman, dean of students at Northwestern University School of Law, agreed: "It's a very rigorous and demanding curriculum, and it tends to allow for the worst things to happen, particularly if there aren't any proactive measures by law schools to alleviate or reduce the impact of the stressors in legal education," he said.

Chicago-Kent will be starting that conversation next fall, when entering students will receive a copy of a pamphlet Krieger wrote, outlining the pitfalls that students tend to encounter in law school and discussing the statistics related to law student and lawyer depression. "One of the things we can do is, from the outset, just try to alert students there are these issues," Sowle said, adding that the school also offers workshops to students throughout the year to help them adjust to their new surroundings. Optional seminars on note-taking and what to expect on the first set of law school exams help guide students through their first year. Northwestern goes further, extending the discussion of law school depression and anxiety to include professors. In fact, Krieger noted the school is one of a handful of places taking meaningful steps to make their environments a little less harmful to students' mental health.

Zimmerman said his school's approach has many parts: Before the academic year begins, new teachers attend a session to learn about techniques beyond the Socratic method, which has been alternately praised for teaching students to think on their feet and criticized as unnecessarily brutal. Professors who teach classes to first-year students are required to give some form of assessment prior to the final, whether it's a graded midterm or just a practice exam with model answers. Once the school year gets underway, Zimmerman said, many professors incorporate collaborative learning into their courses, asking students to work together on projects or presentations. By the time on-campus interviews come around at the beginning of their second year, students remain unranked within their classes, and they receive interviews through a lottery system; employers cannot screen students based on their grade point averages. The University of Chicago uses a similar lottery system to alleviate the pressure of finding a job without having scored straight A's. "That's the tone of our community," Zimmerman of Northwestern said. "Students are working in groups or teams; they're not stratified. They're not fighting over interviews. It makes it much easier for people to help each other."

Get used to it

Sowle said most law schools aren't going to change the basic educational structures that put pressure on students, or even incorporate some the techniques Northwestern uses. He pointed to the grading curve. "Most law schools don't really have any alternative to it," he said. "The elite law schools can get away with it, but Kent, a second-tier school, would be doing a disservice to students if we didn't have some way of doing class rank." Other changes, like consistently smaller classes, just aren't economically feasible. "It's not as if universities are looking around for ways to waste money," Turow said. "It's hard, when law students leave to $125,000 a year. Claims that it's a harsh experience tend to fall on deaf ears."

Still, Krieger said, more schools should be implementing low-cost changes. "It's like there's no problem," he said. "If you look at law school bulletins and brochures, it's like everybody's happy and it's a wonderful place. Students need to be told: 'This is going to be difficult for you. You're used to being at the top, and our grading system doesn't allow everyone to be at the top.' Come out of denial, so when it happens, students don't internalize it and feel like they're in the wrong place. "We're all smart. We have all these resources, but none of them are going to these problems in the profession," Krieger continued. "Pumping out depressed, confused and poorly motivated graduates is not going to help society."

http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/communicate/newspages/article_full.cfm?eventid=1911
Title: Identifying the psycho in our midst including the socialised psychopathic manage
Post by: MAX REINHARDT on June 18, 2005, 01:32:43 AM
How about an Attention-Seeker plus The Wannabe plus The Guru AND The Sociopath?

The Bully is the worst of all!

http://www.webspawner.com/users/serialb/

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: frame of mind on July 07, 2005, 08:25:07 PM
I had a professor that exhibited the exact and same symptoms this serial bully does! But go ahead and make her and the faculty believe he's really sick!
Title: As to the 'Herd Instinct'
Post by: pro_se on July 08, 2005, 04:54:31 AM
Quote
Morality is herd instinct in the individual.

Crowd behavior is usually considered an ugly phenomenon. Think lynchings, riots, Nazism, China's cultural revolution -- or even financial bubbles and panics. Unreason and prejudice seem to rule. Chances are most people would agree with the Frenchman Gustave Le Bon, who wrote in 1895: "In crowds, it is stupidity and not mother-wit that is accumulated."

Yet, financial journalist James Surowiecki begs to differ. In "The Wisdom of Crowds," the New Yorker staff writer provocatively argues that, in many circumstances, the group collectively reaches better decisions -- and solves problems more efficiently -- than the smartest man or woman alone. In this, the author is supported by social scientists who salute "decentralized self-organizing systems," such as Adam Smith's invisible hand. Crowd wisdom can be seen in the superiority of American market capitalism over Soviet central planning. Surowiecki provides numerous examples of how the many are often smarter than the few, and he explores the implications of the phenomenon. He discusses when tapping into the crowd pays off big and why the group can go wrong. He makes a strong case that society should take advantage of crowd insights rather than depending on experts. In essence, he suggests, Le Bon got it backwards.

The capital markets provide the classic example of Surowiecki's thesis: Even if they are sometimes prone to bouts of enthusiasm or depression, they're an amazing social and economic institution for communicating all kinds of data and knowledge through price changes. The more pervasive the financial markets, the more investors will find and fund profitable ideas and, at the same time, flee from failed management strategies. Sound collective judgment shows up elsewhere in the economy, too. Linux, the open-source operating system created by Finnish programmer Linus Torvalds in 1991 but effectively owned by no one, is now the major rival to Microsoft Corp.'s (MSFT ) Windows. Independent computer programmers from around the world contribute to improving the operating system, and solving the problems that intrigue them, although Torvalds and his peers keep a tight rein on what changes are acceptable.

The collective beats the individual expert in smaller groups, too. Surowiecki offers a number of examples, including the fascinating case of the May, 1968, disappearance of the submarine USS Scorpion on its way to Newport News, Va. The U.S. Navy had a general idea where the sub sank, but it was an area 20 miles wide and many thousands of feet deep. Naval officer John Craven hit upon a solution. He gathered a group of diverse experts and asked for their best guesses on why the sub ran into trouble, its speed as it fell to the ocean floor, the slant of its descent, and so on. Craven took all the speculations, ran them through a sophisticated mathematical formula, and ended up with the team's overall guesstimate. The Navy found the ship 220 yards from where Craven's group had predicted it would be, yet not one individual had picked that spot. "The final estimate was a genuinely collective judgment that the group as a whole had made," says Surowiecki. "It was also a genuinely brilliant judgment."

Of course, the crowd can go spectacularly wrong, as some of the best parts of this book reveal. For instance, the stock market works well most of the time. It is a decentralized mix of enthusiasm and skepticism, longs and shorts -- a global conflict of opinion and judgment that keeps prices within a reasonable approximation of value. Yet speculation at times spirals out of control, and the market becomes a single-minded mob. Witness the latter days of the 1990s, when a critical mass of dazzled investors began thinking that a price-earnings ratio of 100 was conservative and a price-earnings ratio of infinity alluring.

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: tag on July 11, 2005, 11:02:08 AM
I just quit work at a company with 1 serial bully (out of 80 employees), though he was laid off the day before I gave my notice. I never had to work with the guy on a project, but I have seen him at work.

This serial bully was a former IT manager at a huge company and then hired at the company I worked for doing Implementation for new customers. As someone who has worked in IT for 20 years, you would expect him to know Microsoft Excel and Access (no), how to check his email and send attachments in Microsoft Outlook (no), how to use a fax machined (no), or how to type using more than 1 finger (no).

He hid his incompetence with anger and blaming the least informed person connected with an account. He always was frustrated and gave the appearance of being a hard worker. Anyone outside of upper management knew his salary was charity.

One other weird personality trait ... he kept the same coffee mug while at the company, always drank his coffee black, and never washed his coffee mug ... in 3 years. :o

Title: Re: Identifying the psycho in our midst including the socialised psychopathic manage
Post by: labamba on July 17, 2005, 10:04:39 PM
How about an Attention-Seeker plus The Wannabe plus The Guru AND The Sociopath?

The Bully is the worst of all!

http://www.webspawner.com/users/serialb/




Quote
Projection

Bullies project their inadequacies, shortcomings, behaviours etc on to other people to avoid facing up to their inadequacy and doing something about it (learning about oneself can be painful), and to distract and divert attention away from themselves and their inadequacies. Projection is achieved through blame, criticism and allegation; once you realise this, every criticism, allegation etc that the bully makes about their target is actually an admission or revelation about themselves.

This knowledge can be used to perceive the bully's own misdemeanours; for instance, when the allegations are of financial or sexual impropriety, it is likely that the bully has committed these acts; when the bully makes an allegation of abuse (such allegations tend to be vague and non-specific), it is likely to be the bully who has committed the abuse. When the bully makes allegations of, say, "cowardice" or "negative attitude" it is the bully who is a coward or has a negative attitude.


I can see at my school many more people than what you'd be willing to label as "serial bullies" exhibiting this trait ..
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: )( on August 08, 2005, 04:11:02 AM
Most of the complaints about lawyers are concerned with just plain bad manners. Lawyers who refuse to accept or return client phone calls top the list. Lawyers who are arrogant, abusive and patronizing to their clients are next.

MENTALLY ILL LAWYERS. The legal profession has found it necessary to create extensive suicide prevention, drug and alcohol counselling and help services for judges and lawyers. There exists a number of lawyers and judges who think they are demi-gods and who are bordering on meglomania and narcissistic personality disorder and a sense of entitlement that is well within the bounds of mental illness.

BULLIES. Judges who believe they have been annointed frequently turn into bullying meglomaniacs. Both come to believe that because they have a law degree they can walk all over people. They misuse their power to insult, attack and intimidate others. They are proof that power corrupts.

If a lawyer is rude, this is sufficient to suggest to clients that they avoid such individuals. There are plenty of lawyers who will be polite, respectful and appreciate your business. Why deal with someone who has demonstrated that they need to read up on basic courtesy?

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: _/ on August 16, 2005, 04:10:03 AM
Many attorneys suffer from NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder).

Narcissism, in human psychology is the pattern of thinking and behaving which involves infatuation and obsession with one's self to the exclusion of others. It may be seen manifest in the chronic pursuit of personal gratification and public attention, in social dominance and personal ambition, braggadocio, insensitivity to others (lack of empathy) and/or excessive dependence on others to meet his/her responsibilities in daily living and thinking.

The narcissist has an unhealthily high self-esteem. For the narcissist, self-worth is the belief that he/she is superior to his/her fellow humans; it is not enough to be "okay" or "pretty good," the narcissist can only feel worthwhile by experiencing him/herself as the "best". From childhood through adulthood, this narcissistic belief may be reinforced by others to the extent that the narcissist is actually competent, intelligent and/or attractive, or is manipulative enough to get others to make him/her seem competent, intelligent or attractive.

The narcissist most often comes to the attention of the mental health profession when, beset by some personal failure or having otherwise become aware of his/her lack of superiority, he/she falls into an acute depressive or anxiety state, or even becomes temporarily psychotic. Unfortunately, the emergence of such states has often been misinterpreted by mental health professionals as a sign that the narcissist fundamentally suffers from low self esteem. As a result, psychotherapy often ends up simply restoring the narcissism rather than helping the patient accept his/her true equality and mortality.

Conversely, narcissists who are repeatedly confronted with their own human limitations - often due to a lack of skills, intelligence, looks or social support necessary to maintain external reinforcement of their ultimate superiority - may become frustrated, angry and even dangerously aggressive. At this point, the narcissistic may evolve into a sociopath.

The term narcissism was first used in relation to human psychology by Sigmund Freud after the figure of Narcissus in Greek mythology (right). Narcissus was a handsome Greek youth who rejected the desperate advances of the nymph Echo. As a punishment, he was doomed to fall in love with his own reflection in a pool of water. Unable to consummate his love, Narcissus pined away and changed into the flower that bears his name, the narcissus.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/52/Narcissus.jpg)

A narcissistic personality disorder as defined by the DSM (see DSM cautionary statement) is characterized by an all-pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration or adulation and lack of empathy, usually beginning by early adulthood and present in various contexts. Five (or more) of the following criteria are considered necessary for the clinical diagnosis to be met:

- Feels grandiose and self-important (e.g., exaggerates accomplishments, talents, skills, contacts, and personality traits to the point of lying, demands to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements);
- Is obsessed with fantasies of unlimited success, fame, fearsome power or omnipotence, unequalled brilliance (the cerebral narcissist), bodily beauty or sexual performance (the somatic narcissist), or ideal, everlasting, all-conquering love or passion;
- Firmly convinced that they are unique and, being special, can only be understood by, should only be treated by, or associate with, other special or unique, or high-status people (or institutions);
- Requires excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation — or, failing that, wishes to be feared and to be notorious (narcissistic supply);
- Feels entitled. Demands automatic and full compliance with their unreasonable expectations for special and favorable priority treatment.
- Is "interpersonally exploitative", i.e., uses others to achieve their own ends;
- Devoid of empathy. Is unable or unwilling to identify with, acknowledge, or accept the feelings, needs, preferences, priorities, and choices of others;
- Constantly envious of others and seeks to hurt or destroy the objects of their frustration.
- Suffers from persecutory (paranoid) delusions stemming from a belief that others are envious of them and are likely to act similarly;
- Behaves arrogantly and haughtily. Feels superior, omnipotent, omniscient, invincible, immune, "above the law", and omnipresent (magical thinking). Rages when frustrated, contradicted, or confronted by people they consider inferior to themselves and unworthy.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: MR2Tyler on August 16, 2005, 08:03:57 AM
Anti-social personality disorder (what the original poster was talking about, assumedly, with their references to sociopathy) is a relatively common disorder that is often correlated with higher than average intelligence and a strongly competitive nature.  It seems intuitive for the law to attract individuals diagnosable with ASP.  What bugs me is the implication that sociopathy is bad.

:)

I'm not kidding.  If the traits that are comorbid with sociopathy lead to sociopaths being better attorneys, and if our society wants good attorneys, then that seems like a good impetus for the ABA to start recruiting anti-social individuals.  Heck, they practically do already.  I'm a firm believer in Michel Foucault's outlook that diagnoses are only valuable in the context of understanding maladaptive behavior.  As soon as you start making judgments about an individual's fitness from the fact that they're diagnosable - not from any specific actions the individual has undertaken - the diagnosis itself has become maladaptive from a societal standpoint.

-Ty
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: katrina on September 02, 2005, 03:03:14 PM
Many attorneys suffer from NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder).

Narcissism, in human psychology is the pattern of thinking and behaving which involves infatuation and obsession with one's self to the exclusion of others. It may be seen manifest in the chronic pursuit of personal gratification and public attention, in social dominance and personal ambition, braggadocio, insensitivity to others (lack of empathy) and/or excessive dependence on others to meet his/her responsibilities in daily living and thinking.

The narcissist has an unhealthily high self-esteem. For the narcissist, self-worth is the belief that he/she is superior to his/her fellow humans; it is not enough to be "okay" or "pretty good," the narcissist can only feel worthwhile by experiencing him/herself as the "best". From childhood through adulthood, this narcissistic belief may be reinforced by others to the extent that the narcissist is actually competent, intelligent and/or attractive, or is manipulative enough to get others to make him/her seem competent, intelligent or attractive.

The narcissist most often comes to the attention of the mental health profession when, beset by some personal failure or having otherwise become aware of his/her lack of superiority, he/she falls into an acute depressive or anxiety state, or even becomes temporarily psychotic. Unfortunately, the emergence of such states has often been misinterpreted by mental health professionals as a sign that the narcissist fundamentally suffers from low self esteem. As a result, psychotherapy often ends up simply restoring the narcissism rather than helping the patient accept his/her true equality and mortality.

Conversely, narcissists who are repeatedly confronted with their own human limitations - often due to a lack of skills, intelligence, looks or social support necessary to maintain external reinforcement of their ultimate superiority - may become frustrated, angry and even dangerously aggressive. At this point, the narcissistic may evolve into a sociopath.

The term narcissism was first used in relation to human psychology by Sigmund Freud after the figure of Narcissus in Greek mythology (right). Narcissus was a handsome Greek youth who rejected the desperate advances of the nymph Echo. As a punishment, he was doomed to fall in love with his own reflection in a pool of water. Unable to consummate his love, Narcissus pined away and changed into the flower that bears his name, the narcissus.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/52/Narcissus.jpg)

A narcissistic personality disorder as defined by the DSM (see DSM cautionary statement) is characterized by an all-pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration or adulation and lack of empathy, usually beginning by early adulthood and present in various contexts. Five (or more) of the following criteria are considered necessary for the clinical diagnosis to be met:

- Feels grandiose and self-important (e.g., exaggerates accomplishments, talents, skills, contacts, and personality traits to the point of lying, demands to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements);
- Is obsessed with fantasies of unlimited success, fame, fearsome power or omnipotence, unequalled brilliance (the cerebral narcissist), bodily beauty or sexual performance (the somatic narcissist), or ideal, everlasting, all-conquering love or passion;
- Firmly convinced that they are unique and, being special, can only be understood by, should only be treated by, or associate with, other special or unique, or high-status people (or institutions);
- Requires excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation — or, failing that, wishes to be feared and to be notorious (narcissistic supply);
- Feels entitled. Demands automatic and full compliance with their unreasonable expectations for special and favorable priority treatment.
- Is "interpersonally exploitative", i.e., uses others to achieve their own ends;
- Devoid of empathy. Is unable or unwilling to identify with, acknowledge, or accept the feelings, needs, preferences, priorities, and choices of others;
- Constantly envious of others and seeks to hurt or destroy the objects of their frustration.
- Suffers from persecutory (paranoid) delusions stemming from a belief that others are envious of them and are likely to act similarly;
- Behaves arrogantly and haughtily. Feels superior, omnipotent, omniscient, invincible, immune, "above the law", and omnipresent (magical thinking). Rages when frustrated, contradicted, or confronted by people they consider inferior to themselves and unworthy.


The majority of students at my school would fit this description!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: istically on September 06, 2005, 04:17:48 PM
Take personality disorders with a grain of salt, they're not real diseases!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: pissedoff11 on September 23, 2005, 06:41:25 PM
Quote
It seems intuitive for the law to attract individuals diagnosable with ASP.  What bugs me is the implication that sociopathy is bad.

:)

I'm not kidding.  If the traits that are comorbid with sociopathy lead to sociopaths being better attorneys, and if our society wants good attorneys, then that seems like a good impetus for the ABA to start recruiting anti-social individuals. 

Prepare a proposal for the ABA, what are you waiting for?
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Bonkers, Jr. on September 23, 2005, 10:36:14 PM
PS -- sociopathy and psychopathy are not synonyms, they are two different things.
Title: ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY, SOCIOPATHY, AND PSYCHOPATHY
Post by: nesty on September 30, 2005, 01:41:36 PM
"When I'm good, I'm very good. When I'm bad, I'm better." (Mae West)

People who cannot contain their urges to harm (or kill) people repeatedly for no apparent reason are assumed to suffer from some mental illness. However, they may be more cruel than crazy, they may be choosing not to control their urges, they know right from wrong, they know exactly what they're doing, and they are definitely NOT insane, at least according to the consensus of most scholars. In such cases, they usually fall into 1 of 3 types that are typically considered aggravating circumstances in addition to their legal guilt -- antisocial personality disorder (APD), sociopath, or psychopath -- none of which are the same as insanity or psychosis. APD is the most common type, afflicting about 4% of the general population. Sociopaths are the second most common type, with the APA estimating that 3% of all males in our society are sociopaths. Psychopaths are rare, found in perhaps 1% of the population.

Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD) is practically synonymous with criminal behavior. It's so synonymous, in fact, that practically all convicted criminals (65-75%) have it, with criminologists often referring to it as a "wastebasket" category.  Antisocials come is all shapes and sizes, but psychologists consider the juvenile version of it to be a juvenile conduct disorder. The main characteristic of it is a complete and utter disregard for the rights of others and the rules of society. They seldom show anxiety and don't feel guilt. There's really no effective treatment for them other than locking them up in a secure facility with such rigid rules that they cannot talk their way out. A full list of APD traits would include:

Sense of entitlement;
Unremorseful;
Apathetic to others;
Unconscionable behavior;
Blameful of others;
Manipulative and conning;
Affectively cold;
Disparate understanding;
Socially irresponsible;
Disregardful of obligations;
Nonconforming to norms;
Irresponsible

whereas the DSM-IV "clinical" features of Antisocial Personality Disorder (with a person having at least 3 of these characteristics) are:

Clinical Symptoms for an Antisocial Personality Disorder Diagnosis
 
1. Failure to conform to social norms;
2. Deceitfulness, manipulativeness;
3. Impulsivity, failure to plan ahead;
4. Irritability, aggressiveness;
5. Reckless disregard for the safety of self or others;
6. Consistent irresponsibility;
7. Lack of remorse after having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another person

Sociopathy is chiefly characterized by something wrong with the person's conscience. They either don't have one, it's full of holes like Swiss cheese, or they are somehow able to completely neutralize or negate any sense of conscience or future time perspective. Sociopaths only care about fulfilling their own needs and desires - selfishness and egocentricity to the extreme. Everything and everybody else is mentally twisted around in their minds as objects to be used in fulfilling their own needs and desires. They often believe they are doing something good for society, or at least nothing that bad. The term "sociopath" is frequently used by psychologists and sociologists alike in referring to persons whose unsocialized character is due primarily to parental failures (usually fatherlessness) rather than an inherent feature of temperament. Lykken (1995), for example, clearly distinguishes between the sociopath (who is socialized into becoming a psychopath) and a "true" psychopath (who is born that way). However, this may only describe the "common sociopath", as there are at least 4 different subtypes -- common, alienated, aggressive, and dyssocial. Commons are characterized mostly by their lack of conscience; the alienated by their inability to love or be loved; aggressives by a consistent sadistic streak; and dyssocials by an ability to abide by gang rules, as long as those rules are the wrong rules. Some common sociopathic traits include:

Egocentricity;
Callousness;
Impulsivity;
Conscience defect;
Exaggerated sexuality;
Excessive boasting;
Risk taking;
Inability to resist temptation;
Antagonistic, deprecating attitude toward the opposite sex;
Lack of interest in bonding with a mate

Psychopathy is a concept subject to much debate, but is usually defined as a constellation of affective, interpersonal, and behavioral characteristics including \

egocentricity;
impulsivity;
irresponsibility;
shallow emotions;
lack of empathy, guilt, or remorse;
pathological lying;
manipulativeness;
and the persistent violation of social norms and expectations

The crimes of psychopaths are usually stone-cold, remorseless killings for no apparent reason. They cold-bloodedly take what they want and do as they please without the slightest sense of guilt or regret. In many ways, they are natural-born intraspecies predators who satisfy their lust for power and control by charm, manipulation, intimidation, and violence. While almost all societies would regard them as criminals (the exception being frontier or warlike societies where they might become heroes, patriots, or leaders), it's important to distinguish their behavior from criminal behavior. As a common axiom goes in psychology, MOST PSYCHOPATHS ARE ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITIES BUT NOT ALL ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITIES ARE PSYCHOPATHS. This is because APD is defined mainly by behaviors (Factor 2 antisocial behaviors) and doesn't tap the affective/interpersonal dimensions (Factor 1 core psychopathic features, narcissism) of psychopathy. Further, criminals and APDs tend to "age out" of crime; psychopaths do not, and are at high risk of recidivism. Psychopaths love to intellectualize in treatment with their half-baked understanding of rules. Like the Star Trek character, Spock, their reasoning cannot handle any mix of cognition and emotion. They are calculating predators who, when trapped, will attempt escape, create a nuisance and danger to staff, be a disruptive influence on other patients or inmates, and fake symptoms to get transferred, bouncing back and forth between institutions. The common features of psychopathic traits are:

Glib and superficial charm;
Grandiose sense of self-worth;
Need for stimulation;
Pathological lying;
Conning and manipulativeness;
Lack of remorse or guilt;
Shallow affect;
Callousness and lack of empathy;
Parasitic lifestyle;
Poor behavioral controls;
Promiscuous sexual behavior;
Early behavior problems;
Lack of realistic, long-term goals;
Impulsivity;
Irresponsibility;
Failure to accept responsibility for own actions;
Many short-term marital relationships;
Juvenile delinquency;
Revocation of conditional release;
Criminal versatility
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: theothertwin on October 23, 2005, 05:48:06 PM
Take personality disorders with a grain of salt, they're not real diseases!

Well, while they are real diseases, I would agree with your post in the sense that there are so many people afflicted with them that makes them sound not that serious. After all, the entire world can't be crazy! lol

"Is everybody crazy?" Writer Jim Windolf posed the question in an October 1997 issue of The New York Observer, and then answered it himself with numbers.

If you add up all the psychological ailments Americans complain of, the portrait that emerges is of a nation of basket-cases.

10 (ten) million suffer from Seasonal Affective Disorder.
14 (fourteen) million are alcoholics.
15 (fifteen) million are depressed.
3 (three) million suffer panic attacks.
10 (ten) million have Borderline Personality Disorder.
5 (five) million are obsessive-compulsive.
2 (two) million are manic-depressive.

Factoring in wild-card afflictions like Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and multiple chemical sensitivity, and allowing for overlap (folks suffering from more than one problem), Windolf concluded that "77 percent of the adult population is a mess."
 

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: pm on October 27, 2005, 08:45:47 PM
Interesting thread ,,
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: scintilla on November 15, 2005, 10:03:05 PM
Take personality disorders with a grain of salt, they're not real diseases!

Well, while they are real diseases, I would agree with your post in the sense that there are so many people afflicted with them that makes them sound not that serious. After all, the entire world can't be crazy! lol

"Is everybody crazy?" Writer Jim Windolf posed the question in an October 1997 issue of The New York Observer, and then answered it himself with numbers.

If you add up all the psychological ailments Americans complain of, the portrait that emerges is of a nation of basket-cases.

10 (ten) million suffer from Seasonal Affective Disorder.
14 (fourteen) million are alcoholics.
15 (fifteen) million are depressed.
3 (three) million suffer panic attacks.
10 (ten) million have Borderline Personality Disorder.
5 (five) million are obsessive-compulsive.
2 (two) million are manic-depressive.

Factoring in wild-card afflictions like Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and multiple chemical sensitivity, and allowing for overlap (folks suffering from more than one problem), Windolf concluded that "77% of the adult population is a mess."
 
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: DanteHicks on November 16, 2005, 08:44:22 AM
Forget the DSM_IV...refer to Hervey Cleckley's and Dr. Robert Hare's works on Psychopathy...perhaps even Benjamin Wolman (whom appear to already have been consulted according to some of these posts).
Title: Re: The serial bully
Post by: rezipsa on November 16, 2005, 08:55:14 AM
How about an Attention-Seeker plus The Wannabe plus The Guru AND The Sociopath?
He sits next to you too?
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: cuteprincess on November 18, 2005, 10:36:09 AM
Some attorney, well actually most attorneys are such pompus pricks.  I truly mean that.  I think when they say knowledge is power, they think they have too much power.

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: jacy85 on November 18, 2005, 01:19:43 PM
Some attorney, well actually most attorneys are such pompus pricks.  I truly mean that.  I think when they say knowledge is power, they think they have too much power.

And this statement is bull.  Maybe most attorneys you happen to know are pompus pricks.  But to make such a huge sweeping statement like this is just ignorant.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: cuteprincess on November 19, 2005, 12:41:03 AM
I didn't say "ALL" attorneys, I said maybe most.  Most attorneys that I know are so into themselves.  Apparently you don't know that many.  Maybe if you did, you'd understand my comment.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: jacy85 on November 19, 2005, 07:31:11 AM
I worked for a firm with out 120 attorneys for 2 years, and the pompous pricks were the great exception rather than the rule.  There were maybe 5 or 6 that were arrogant and rude to everyone around them.  That's hardly "most" attorneys.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: DanteHicks on November 19, 2005, 04:03:57 PM
You guys make it sound as if being a "pompous prick" is a negative thing.

 :-\
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: jacy85 on November 19, 2005, 07:51:17 PM
 :D
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: cuteprincess on November 21, 2005, 11:18:11 AM
That's funny.     ::)
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: thee on November 21, 2005, 12:26:56 PM
LOL cuteprincess!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: DC on December 02, 2005, 06:13:42 AM
actually most attorneys are such pompus pricks. 

We use here BIGSHOT A S S H O L E as a more appropriate designation.
Title: The solution
Post by: w/m on December 10, 2005, 08:23:44 PM
(http://www.girdersandgears.com/temsi/screw-nut.jpg)
Screw For Nut
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: talented on December 24, 2005, 07:54:28 AM
sadly enough the majority of lawyers are nothing else but paranoid a s s h o l e s in suits
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: theresa*s on February 06, 2006, 08:19:27 PM
Many attorneys suffer from NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder).

A narcissistic personality disorder as defined by the DSM (see DSM cautionary statement) is characterized by an all-pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration or adulation and lack of empathy, usually beginning by early adulthood and present in various contexts. Five (or more) of the following criteria are considered necessary for the clinical diagnosis to be met:

- Feels grandiose and self-important (e.g., exaggerates accomplishments, talents, skills, contacts, and personality traits to the point of lying, demands to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements);
- Is obsessed with fantasies of unlimited success, fame, fearsome power or omnipotence, unequalled brilliance (the cerebral narcissist), bodily beauty or sexual performance (the somatic narcissist), or ideal, everlasting, all-conquering love or passion;
- Firmly convinced that they are unique and, being special, can only be understood by, should only be treated by, or associate with, other special or unique, or high-status people (or institutions);
- Requires excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation — or, failing that, wishes to be feared and to be notorious (narcissistic supply);
- Feels entitled. Demands automatic and full compliance with their unreasonable expectations for special and favorable priority treatment.
- Is "interpersonally exploitative", i.e., uses others to achieve their own ends;
- Devoid of empathy. Is unable or unwilling to identify with, acknowledge, or accept the feelings, needs, preferences, priorities, and choices of others;
- Constantly envious of others and seeks to hurt or destroy the objects of their frustration.
- Suffers from persecutory (paranoid) delusions stemming from a belief that others are envious of them and are likely to act similarly;
- Behaves arrogantly and haughtily. Feels superior, omnipotent, omniscient, invincible, immune, "above the law", and omnipresent (magical thinking). Rages when frustrated, contradicted, or confronted by people they consider inferior to themselves and unworthy.


(http://diaspora.class98.org/wp-content/soof/legs.jpg)
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: VCartman on February 06, 2006, 09:18:03 PM
Don't you mean naircissism?  ;)
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: fab on February 10, 2006, 07:08:02 PM
Nice legs, thou! ;)
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: gabry on February 17, 2006, 08:41:56 AM
Chances are you know several psychopaths.  You sit or sat next to them in your classes.  You work or will work with them in your practice.

In The Sociopath Next Door: The Ruthless Versus the Rest of Us, Harvard professor Martha Stout says that "one in twenty-five of us has no conscience and can do absolutely anything at all without feeling guilty.

Contrary to popular misconception, though a large percentage of murders and rapes are committed by sociopaths, most sociopaths don't commit such crimes.  Most are ostensibly law abiding--because of the legal and social sanctions. A high percentage of them are very smart (often charming too). And a majority of them are strongly attracted to power and so seek professions and authority positions with influence over others--without a desire for the actual responsibility, of course.

When stepping on others benefits them a small amount and costs them nothing, they don't hesitate. Worse, when they can get away with it without repercussion, they make others jump or suffer simply for the sensation of power. (Why not? The harm they cause others doesn't trouble them.)

4% of the population. 1 in 25. More in law than other fields. Pretty shocking, eh? Makes you wonder about those around you doesn't it? As well it should, because that 4% is responsible for a disproportionate share of the needless, intentionally inflicted or callously tolerated, pain and suffering in the world.

The disorder arises in part because of genetics and in part as a result of nurture.  The most popular theory is that it arises from an early attachment disorder.  It's an odd and sad fact that orphaned babies in hospitals die if not handled.  Insufficient physical contact and affectionate/responsive care of a baby's needs inhibits development of certain human qualities--apparently conscience is one of them.

By the way, I would like to stray further from the law and interject here that I think the modern western practice of housing a baby in a separate room and ignoring its cries (a practice only common in a recent fraction of human existence, and still not common practice in most of the world--where sleeping with the baby is still the norm), though endorsed by some modern doctors peddling new parenting concepts such as "teaching the baby to self-soothe" (read: facillitating parent rationalization) is very harmful.  Not only does it cause the baby very real and unnecessary anxiety (throughout evolution abandoned babies were at risk to predators, etc.) and create a lack of trust in their parents, it stunts their development.  Just because lots of other people you know are now isolating their children doesn't mean it's best or even right.  Similarly, the very recent practice of sending babies and toddlers to day care is, though prevalent and in the cases of working mothers often necessary, usually a poor substitute for traditional mother/home care, and may be detrimental.

---------------------
Note: Sociopathy and psychopathy are synomyms. Modernly, the APA terms it a personality disorder: the Antisocial Personality Disorder.

In the 19th century, psychopathology was considered to be "moral insanity". Today it is commonly known as "antisocial personality disorder" or "sociopathology." Current experts believe that sociopaths are an unfortunate fusion of interpersonal, biological and sociocultural disasters.

Psychopaths/sociopaths are diagnosed by their purposeless and irrational antisocial behavior, lack of conscience, and emotional vacuity. They are thrill seekers, literally fearless. Punishment rarely works, because they are impulsive by nature and fearless of the consequences. Incapable of having meaningful relationships, they view others as fodder for manipulation and exploitation. According to one psychological surveying tool (DSM IIIR) between 3 - 5% of men are sociopaths; less than 1% of female population are sociopaths.

Psychopaths often make successful businessmen or world leaders. Not all psychopaths are motivated to kill. But when it is easy to devalue others, and you have had a lifetime of perceived injustices and rejection, murder might seem like a natural choice.

The following are environmental factors, psychiatrists say, which create a sociopath:

• Studies show that 60% of psychopathic individuals had lost a parent;

• Child is deprived of love or nurturing; parents are detached or absent;

• Inconsistent discipline: if father is stern and mother is soft, child learns to hate authority and manipulate mother;

• Hypocritical parents who privately belittle the child while publicly presenting the image of a "happy family".

According to Dr. J. Reid Meloy, author of The Psychopathic Mind: Origins, Dynamics, and Treatment, the psychopath is only capable of sadomasochistic relationships based on power, not attachment. Psychopaths identify with the aggressive role model, such as an abusive parent, and attack the weaker, more vulnerable self by projecting it onto others. As multiple murderer Dennis Nilsen put it, "I was killing myself only but it was always the bystander who died."

Dr. Meloy writes that in early childhood development, there is a split in the infant psychopath: the "soft me" which is the vulnerable inside, and the "hard not-me" which is the intrusive, punishing outside (neglectful or painful experiences.) The infant comes to expect that all outside experiences will be painful, and so he turns inward. In an attempt to protect himself from a harsh environment, the infant develops a "character armor," distrusting everything outside, and refusing to allow anything in. The child refuses to identify with parents, and instead sees the parent as a malevolent stranger.

Soon, the child has no empathy for anyone. The wall has been built to last. "Human nature is a nuisance, and fills me with disgust. Every so often one must let off steam, as it were," said "Acid Bath Murderer" John Haigh.

In normal development, the child bonds with the mother for nurturing and love. But for the psychopath, the mother is experienced as an "aggressive predator, or passive stranger." In the case of violent psychopaths, including serial killers, the child bonds through sadomasochism or aggression. According to Meloy, "This individual perversely and aggressively does to others as a predator what may, at any time, be done to him."
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: mendeleiev on February 20, 2006, 03:35:18 PM
Lawyers resemble very much to the ancient Jew priests who were people who lied coolly and easily, even when it is obvious they were being untruthful. It was almost impossible for them to be consistently truthful about either a major or minor issue. They lie for no apparent reason, even when it would be easier and safer to tell the truth. This is sometimes called "crazy lying". Confronting their lies may provoke an unpredictably intense rage or simply a Buddha-like smile.

Another form of lying common among ancient Jew priests leaders was known as "pseudologica fantastica," an extension of pathological lying. They tend to create a complex belief system, often about their own powers and abilities, in which they themselves sometimes get caught up. It is often difficult to determine whether the lies are an actual delusional distortion of reality or are expressed with the conscious or unconscous intent to deceive.

These manipulators are rarely original thinkers. Plagerists and thieves, they seldom credit the true originators of ideas, often coopting authorship. They are extremely convincing, forceful in the expression of their views, and talented at passing lie detector tests. For them, objective truth does not exist. The only "truth" is whatever will best achieve the outcome that meets their needs.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: jisel on February 26, 2006, 06:44:10 PM
Very interesting ..
Title: Compensatory Narcissistic Personality Disorder
Post by: braggadocio on May 13, 2006, 04:01:14 PM
Many attorneys suffer from NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder).

Narcissism, in human psychology is the pattern of thinking and behaving which involves infatuation and obsession with one's self to the exclusion of others. It may be seen manifest in the chronic pursuit of personal gratification and public attention, in social dominance and personal ambition, braggadocio, insensitivity to others (lack of empathy) and/or excessive dependence on others to meet his/her responsibilities in daily living and thinking.

The narcissist has an unhealthily high self-esteem. For the narcissist, self-worth is the belief that he/she is superior to his/her fellow humans; it is not enough to be "okay" or "pretty good," the narcissist can only feel worthwhile by experiencing him/herself as the "best". From childhood through adulthood, this narcissistic belief may be reinforced by others to the extent that the narcissist is actually competent, intelligent and/or attractive, or is manipulative enough to get others to make him/her seem competent, intelligent or attractive.

The narcissist most often comes to the attention of the mental health profession when, beset by some personal failure or having otherwise become aware of his/her lack of superiority, he/she falls into an acute depressive or anxiety state, or even becomes temporarily psychotic. Unfortunately, the emergence of such states has often been misinterpreted by mental health professionals as a sign that the narcissist fundamentally suffers from low self esteem. As a result, psychotherapy often ends up simply restoring the narcissism rather than helping the patient accept his/her true equality and mortality.

Conversely, narcissists who are repeatedly confronted with their own human limitations - often due to a lack of skills, intelligence, looks or social support necessary to maintain external reinforcement of their ultimate superiority - may become frustrated, angry and even dangerously aggressive. At this point, the narcissistic may evolve into a sociopath.

The term narcissism was first used in relation to human psychology by Sigmund Freud after the figure of Narcissus in Greek mythology (right). Narcissus was a handsome Greek youth who rejected the desperate advances of the nymph Echo. As a punishment, he was doomed to fall in love with his own reflection in a pool of water. Unable to consummate his love, Narcissus pined away and changed into the flower that bears his name, the narcissus.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/52/Narcissus.jpg)

A narcissistic personality disorder as defined by the DSM (see DSM cautionary statement) is characterized by an all-pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration or adulation and lack of empathy, usually beginning by early adulthood and present in various contexts. Five (or more) of the following criteria are considered necessary for the clinical diagnosis to be met:

- Feels grandiose and self-important (e.g., exaggerates accomplishments, talents, skills, contacts, and personality traits to the point of lying, demands to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements);
- Is obsessed with fantasies of unlimited success, fame, fearsome power or omnipotence, unequalled brilliance (the cerebral narcissist), bodily beauty or sexual performance (the somatic narcissist), or ideal, everlasting, all-conquering love or passion;
- Firmly convinced that they are unique and, being special, can only be understood by, should only be treated by, or associate with, other special or unique, or high-status people (or institutions);
- Requires excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation — or, failing that, wishes to be feared and to be notorious (narcissistic supply);
- Feels entitled. Demands automatic and full compliance with their unreasonable expectations for special and favorable priority treatment.
- Is "interpersonally exploitative", i.e., uses others to achieve their own ends;
- Devoid of empathy. Is unable or unwilling to identify with, acknowledge, or accept the feelings, needs, preferences, priorities, and choices of others;
- Constantly envious of others and seeks to hurt or destroy the objects of their frustration.
- Suffers from persecutory (paranoid) delusions stemming from a belief that others are envious of them and are likely to act similarly;
- Behaves arrogantly and haughtily. Feels superior, omnipotent, omniscient, invincible, immune, "above the law", and omnipresent (magical thinking). Rages when frustrated, contradicted, or confronted by people they consider inferior to themselves and unworthy.


The NPD is very deceiving -- there are many people who suffer in fact from the Compensatory Narcissistic Personality Disorder instead of NPD. CNPD is characterized by a pervasive pattern of unstable, overtly narcissistic behaviors that derive from an underlying sense of insecurity and weakness rather than from genuine feelings of self-confidence and high self-esteem, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by ten (or more) of the following:

- seeks to create an illusion of superiority and to build up an image of high self-worth;
- has disturbances in the capacity for empathy;
- strives for recognition and prestige to compensate for the lack of a feeling of self-worth;
- may acquire a deprecatory attitude in which the achievements of others are ridiculed and degraded;
- has persistent aspirations for glory and status;
- has a tendency to exaggerate and boast;
- is sensitive to how others react to him or her, watches and listens carefully for critical judgment, and feels slighted by disapproval;
- is prone to feel shamed and humiliated and especially hyper-anxious and vulnerable to the judgments of others;
- covers up a sense of inadequacy and deficiency with pseudo-arrogance and pseudo-grandiosity;
- has a tendency to periodic hypochondria;
- alternates between feelings of emptiness and deadness and states of excitement and excess energy;
- entertains fantasies of greatness, constantly striving for perfection, genius, or stardom;
- has a history of searching for an idealized partner and has an intense need for affirmation and confirmation in relationships;
- frequently entertains a wishful, exaggerated, and unrealistic concept of himself or herself which he or she can't possibly measure up to;
- produces (too quickly) work not up to the level of his or her abilities because of an overwhelmingly strong need for the immediate gratification of success;
- is touchy, quick to take offense at the slightest provocation, continually anticipating attack and danger, reacting with anger and fantasies of revenge when he or she feels frustrated in his or her need for constant admiration;
- is self-conscious, due to a dependence on approval from others;
- suffers regularly from repetitive oscillations of self-esteem;
- seeks to undo feelings of inadequacy by forcing everyone's attention and admiration upon himself or herself;
- may react with self-contempt and depression to the lack of fulfillment of his or her grandiose expectations.
Title: NES
Post by: eraprank on May 24, 2006, 11:08:28 AM
Many attorneys suffer from NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder).

Narcissism, in human psychology is the pattern of thinking and behaving which involves infatuation and obsession with one's self to the exclusion of others. It may be seen manifest in the chronic pursuit of personal gratification and public attention, in social dominance and personal ambition, braggadocio, insensitivity to others (lack of empathy) and/or excessive dependence on others to meet his/her responsibilities in daily living and thinking.

The narcissist has an unhealthily high self-esteem. For the narcissist, self-worth is the belief that he/she is superior to his/her fellow humans; it is not enough to be "okay" or "pretty good," the narcissist can only feel worthwhile by experiencing him/herself as the "best". From childhood through adulthood, this narcissistic belief may be reinforced by others to the extent that the narcissist is actually competent, intelligent and/or attractive, or is manipulative enough to get others to make him/her seem competent, intelligent or attractive.

The narcissist most often comes to the attention of the mental health profession when, beset by some personal failure or having otherwise become aware of his/her lack of superiority, he/she falls into an acute depressive or anxiety state, or even becomes temporarily psychotic. Unfortunately, the emergence of such states has often been misinterpreted by mental health professionals as a sign that the narcissist fundamentally suffers from low self esteem. As a result, psychotherapy often ends up simply restoring the narcissism rather than helping the patient accept his/her true equality and mortality.

Conversely, narcissists who are repeatedly confronted with their own human limitations - often due to a lack of skills, intelligence, looks or social support necessary to maintain external reinforcement of their ultimate superiority - may become frustrated, angry and even dangerously aggressive. At this point, the narcissistic may evolve into a sociopath.

The term narcissism was first used in relation to human psychology by Sigmund Freud after the figure of Narcissus in Greek mythology (right). Narcissus was a handsome Greek youth who rejected the desperate advances of the nymph Echo. As a punishment, he was doomed to fall in love with his own reflection in a pool of water. Unable to consummate his love, Narcissus pined away and changed into the flower that bears his name, the narcissus.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/52/Narcissus.jpg)


by A. Harrison Barnes, Esq.

The word narcissism comes from the character made famous by the Greek poet Ovid, Narcissus, who fell in love with his own reflection. In the story, Echo falls in love with Narcissus and gets rejected. The story makes clear that Narcissus is only able to love himself and not others. Conversely, Echo completely loses herself in her love for Narcissus and has no sense of self at all. At the end of the story, Narcissus tells Echo, "I would die before I give you power over me." Echo responds, "I give you power over me." Both Narcissus and Echo die because their love is unattainable. Many of us cannot find a balance between ourselves and others.

One of the greatest problems facing young associates inside law firms is what I call Narcissistic Entitlement Syndrome ("NES"). Attorneys who suffer from NES often very quickly find themselves out of jobs, whether they quit, are fired, or simply move among employers to deal with the disorder. I need to be clear that this, in my opinion, is an extremely serious subject and something I believe probably at least 10% of the associates in large and prestigious law firms suffer from. This is a disorder I see virtually every week in my conversations with attorneys, and it is something that will cause problems in your career.

This article (a) defines NES and its symptoms and (b) explores the effects of the Entitlement Syndrome on your career.

A. NES Defined

NES, in its shortest form, can be defined as an attorney being inwardly focused and oblivious to the people and organizations around him/her that he/she is supposed to serve. I link the concepts of entitlement and narcissism in this syndrome because the sense of entitlement most often has narcissistic undertones. Attorneys with NES see themselves as special, believe they should have whatever they want regardless of the feelings of others, and continually inflate themselves while putting others down. There are five major characteristics that attorneys with NES often have.

- First, they are generally preoccupied with fantasies of limitless brilliance, power, and success. While this may be something that many attorneys have, the attorney with NES will generally be quite consumed with these fantasies. Advancement and achievement are extremely important to them, and they envision the environment around them as one where they should be the center of others' attention due to their achievements.

- Second, attorneys with NES generally have an exaggerated sense of self-importance that is not commensurate with their actual level of achievement. They expect to be recognized as superior to others without a corresponding level of achievement. An attorney with NES will also generally exaggerate his/her achievements to others. Indeed, attorneys with NES like to speak about their achievements (and do) quite frequently. As a product of these fantasies, the attorney will often show a very arrogant attitude. The attorney with NES believes he/she is special and should only associate and work for other high-status people and institutions.

- Third, attorneys with NES generally lack empathy and are unwilling (or unable) to identify with the needs or feelings of others. Interpersonally, they are often quite exploitative and take advantage of others in order to achieve their own ends. In this respect, the attorney with NES often views those around him/her as objects to be manipulated to be in service of his/her ultimate fantasies of power, for example.

- Fourth, attorneys with NES are most often very envious of those around them with advantages they do not have and believe that others are also envious of them.

- Fifth, attorneys with NES require excessive admiration. They need constant approval from those around them. The NES attorney believes that he/she should be admired by others.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: eraprank on May 24, 2006, 11:08:40 AM
While the psychological underpinnings of this could certainly be explored in great detail, the narcissism is usually something that the attorney has developed as a façade and coping mechanism to deal with underlying feelings of defectiveness and isolation. When such attorneys and their work are criticized, they often react with great internal rage because they believe their self-image has been deflated. Their response is often to isolate themselves, and they may do so by leaving the practice of law, switching firms, or simply having rage for those who have criticized them.

There is a difference between health and unhealthy narcissism inside a law firm. It is, of course, healthy to have a basic sense of your rights. You have a right to not be treated unfairly, and you also have a right to be proud of your achievements and to tell others about them. Narcissism becomes unhealthy, however, if you become obsessed with having people think you are special, and not just having a sense of your own rights, but not really caring about the rights of others.

In an essay, "Working with Problems of Narcissism in Entrepreneurial Organizations," Richard Ruth of the University of Virginia writes:

Quote
"Contemporary practitioners, both clinical and organizational, are faced with the pervasive presence of narcissistic disorders in those who consult us. It is a disquieting encounter, because-even as we recognize that our work to understand and assist persons and organizations with narcissistic pathology has increased the reach and efficacy of our interventions, and the lessons of this work in turn have transformatively affected psychoanalytic theories-there are particular qualities to work with narcissism that are painful to work with analytically, perhaps in significant part because they militate against a defensive introduction of non-analytic methods into analytic work. It is in the nature of narcissistically organized persons, and perhaps also, I will argue, narcissistic organizations, to deny the reality of the other (i.e., the analyst), to wrench the analyst into playing a hated but necessary part in the patient's internal drama, to try to disable or destroy the analyst in the service of a soothing return to a narcissistic self-sufficiency, and to project into the analyst, with resentful hatred, a whole internal world of persecutory and toxic part-objects, as the first step toward eventual understanding, health, and wholeness."
 

While this quote may seem overly complex, it does elucidate a final characteristic of NES that I believe merits consideration: The attorney with NES will not confront his weaknesses due to the fact that to do so would interfere with his sense of self. Instead, institutions and persons that call into question the sense of self of the attorney with NES will be considered toxic. As a final point, this explains why attorneys with NES may move firms frequently or leave the practice of law.

B. The Effects of NES on an Attorney's Career

While I realize the picture painted above of NES may appear extreme, it is important to note that NES is something that is quite common among the highest-performing attorneys. Again, I would estimate that more than 10% of first-year associates in major law firms have NES and will have difficult careers for that reason.

Regarding attorneys with NES, it is generally the associates who have come from the very best American law schools and have had a historical pattern of academic achievement that is nothing short of extraordinary. As I am sure you can understand from the above discussion, NES is something that can actually create the sort of superachiever who shows up to work at a major law firm. In a scholastic environment-where the attorney has the luxury of choosing most of his/her courses, can work hard and get immediate feedback via grades and in conditions where the intelligence of the attorney with NES is such that he/she can perform at such a high academic level-he/she is likely to thrive. Moreover, a goal of attending law school and becoming a powerful lawyer fits in perfectly with the fantasies of the attorney with NES.

It is very easy for me to detect NES when speaking with young attorneys. An attorney with NES generally believes that he/she should be given the type of work that he/she wants. These attorneys also tend to believe that they are extremely intelligent and valuable to their employers. In addition, these sorts of attorneys tend to be very calculating and analyze most situations vis-a-vis whether or not they are getting the upper hand. If they are criticized by their employers, they may simply leave.

As a recruiter, I can tell you that I see this happening all the time. Because our firm solicits telephone calls and interest from the highest-caliber attorneys on a daily basis, the NES attorney is one of the sorts of attorneys we often speak with most frequently. The following similarities generally define the attorneys with NES I speak with:

-They generally have not worked at a "real job" before starting as a first-year associate inside a law firm;
- They generally did exceptionally well in college and attended a top-10 law school (NES, in fact, appears to be more likely the better the law school the person attended);
- They generally come from a sheltered upper-middle-class background, or their parents were academics; and,
- They generally believe they are smarter than the people they are working with.

In essence, the attorney with NES would likely never make it into a prestigious law firm had he/she not been sheltered by school, parents, and others for so long. The artificial academic environment; the home environment of privilege; the positive feedback from academic institutions, where social dynamics are not as emphasized as academic might; and the lack of prior work experience all serve to isolate the NES attorneys and allow their conditions to grow in the absence of a "real" environment. While I would be the first to argue that a law firm is not necessarily a "real" environment, it is much more so the real world than school or an upper-middle-class upbringing is.

The issue with NES inside a law firm is that the attorney with it is in service of themselves. For the most part, being an associate in a law firm is something that is not going to quickly lead to massive glory, riches, or fame. Instead, you are being hired to work hard and make the firm money. In your first 10-15 years, there will be little opportunity for the sort of continual positive feedback and the sorts of reassurances the NES attorney has. In addition, this personality type is not always well suited to the practice of law because attorneys, by nature, are supposed to be focused on the needs of their clients. As an associate, you need to be focused on the needs of the partners you are working for as well as the clients whose work you are doing.

The irony of all this, of course, is that the legal environment is perfectly suited to bringing in young attorneys with NES due to the isolationist factors that are present prior to their entering law firms. These attorneys are never happy inside law firms, the partners they are working for are often astounded by their behavior, and the associates they initially work with often do not know whether to fear NES attorneys or simply resent them. What usually happens to the NES attorney is he/she does not hold up well to the initial criticism all new attorneys get regarding their work products. They do not take orders well, nor do they understand why other associates are considered to be their peers. Such associates most often leave the law very quickly with fantasies about achievement in a work environment that is not of the same caliber of the one they got into initially out of law school. Or they may switch between firms for a few years. Some start their own law firms. A few stick with it and "get better."

C. Conclusions

The seriousness of this topic is far greater than I am even letting on. While this topic has gone unexplored in the legal profession, it is very real and something that affects countless attorneys, especially the ones who appear strongest on paper coming out of law school. I do not pretend to know the answers. Certainly, the inability to find a balance between one's self and others is a condition that is serious. Recognizing the presence of a problem like this is probably the first step. The second step, then, would be correcting the problem by getting help. The entire problem with the condition, though, is that those who need help for it are also very likely to never admit they have this condition.

If you have completed reading this article, you most likely do not have NES because if you did, you would not confront it by reading this article. You would have stopped several paragraphs ago. What you should understand, though, is that the attorneys you work with who have NES are likely on a dangerous collision course with failure. If the NES attorney does not fail within your organization, the chances are good he/she can negatively affect you if you work with him/her. Do your best to avoid NES attorneys.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: expnet on May 25, 2006, 07:38:47 AM
Amazing post, eraprank!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: lil on May 25, 2006, 10:51:55 AM
Indeed, expnet, and I think it'd be awesome if eraprank would also post a primer on the greedness, laziness and assholeness of law firm partners, I forgot what exactly the syndrome is called! 
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: arista on May 29, 2006, 07:25:57 PM
Amen!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: sleepwaking on May 30, 2006, 06:11:06 AM
Budlaw = erapitt
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: aca on May 30, 2006, 06:27:01 AM
Amazing post, eraprank!

Who's eraprick?
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: niggalaw on May 31, 2006, 07:55:29 PM
Eraprick?! How about eradick? Or or erapig?
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: eradicat on June 01, 2006, 07:14:18 AM
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: revelareveritas on June 01, 2006, 12:46:45 PM
Is it bad that I know at least 5 sociopaths and 2 of them are family members?  :o
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: in-law on June 04, 2006, 07:57:54 PM
Many attorneys suffer from NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder).

A narcissistic personality disorder as defined by the DSM (see DSM cautionary statement) is characterized by an all-pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration or adulation and lack of empathy, usually beginning by early adulthood and present in various contexts. Five (or more) of the following criteria are considered necessary for the clinical diagnosis to be met:



Terrorists, serial killers, and mass murderers can be phenomenologically described as narcissists in a constant state of deficient narcissistic supply. The "grandiosity gap" - the painful and narcissistically injurious gap between their grandiose fantasies and their dreary and humiliating reality - becomes emotionally insupportable. They decompensate and act out. They bring "down to their level" (by destroying it) the object of their pathological envy, the cause of their seething frustration, the symbol of their dull achievements, always incommensurate with their inflated self-image. They seek omnipotence through murder, control (not least self control) through violence, prestige, fame and celebrity by defying figures of authorities, challenging them, and humbling them. Unbeknownst to them, they seek self punishment. They are at heart suicidal. They aim to cast themselves as victims by forcing others to punish them. This is called "projective identification". They attribute evil and corruption to their enemies and foes. These forms of paranoia are called projection and splitting. These are all primitive, infantile, and often persecutory, defence mechanisms.

When coupled with narcissism - the inability to empathize, the exploitativeness, the sense of entitlement, the rages, the dehumanization and devaluation of others - this mindset yields abysmal contempt for the narcissist's victims. The overriding emotion of terrorists and serial killers, the amalgam and culmination of their tortured psyche - is deep seated disdain for everything human, the flip side of envy. It is cognitive dissonance gone amok. On the one hand the terrorist, or serial killer derides as "false", "meaningless", "dangerous", and "corrupt" common values, institutions, human intercourse, and society. On the other hand, he devotes his entire life (and often risks it) to the elimination and pulverization of these "insignificant" entities. To justify this apparent contradiction, the mass murderer casts himself as an altruistic savior of a group of people "endangered" by his foes. He is always self-appointed and self-proclaimed, rarely elected. The serial killer and the mass murderer rationalize and intellectualize their murders by purporting to "liberate" or "deliver" the victims from a fate worse than death.

The global reach, the secrecy, the impotence, and growing panic of his victims, of the public, and of his pursuers, the damage he wreaks - all serve as external ego functions. The terrorist cut pasted and serial killer regulate their sense of self esteem and self worth by feeding slavishly on the reactions to their heinous deeds. Their cosmic significance is daily sustained by newspaper headlines, ever increasing bounties, admiring copycats, successful acts of blackmail, the strength and size of their opponents, and the devastation of human life and property. Appeasement works only to aggravate their drives and strengthen their appetites by emboldening them and by raising the threshold of excitation and "narcissistic supply". Terrorists and killers are addicted to this drug of being acknowledged and reflected. They derive their sense of existence, parasitically, from the reactions of their (often captive) audience.

Erich Fromm suggested that both Hitler and Stalin were narcissistic mass murderers. Hitler and Nazism are often portrayed as an apocalyptic and seismic break with European history. Yet the truth is that they were the culmination and reification of European history in the 19th century. Europe's annals of colonialism have prepared it for the range of phenomena associated with the Nazi regime - from industrial murder to racial theories, from slave labour to the forcible annexation of territory.

Germany was a colonial power no different to murderous Belgium or Britain. What set it apart is that it directed its colonial attentions at the heartland of Europe - rather than at Africa or Asia. Both World Wars were colonial wars fought on European soil. Moreover, Nazi Germany innovated by applying prevailing racial theories (usually reserved to non-whites) to the white race itself. It started with the Jews - a non-controversial proposition - but then expanded them to include "east European" whites, such as the Poles and the Russians. Germany was not alone in its malignant nationalism. The far right in France was as pernicious. Nazism - and Fascism - were world ideologies, adopted enthusiastically in places as diverse as Iraq, Egypt, Norway, Latin America, and Britain. At the end of the 1930's, liberal capitalism, communism, and fascism (and its mutations) were locked in mortal battle of ideologies. Hitler's mistake was to delusionally believe in the affinity between capitalism and Nazism - an affinity enhanced, to his mind, by Germany's corporatism and by the existence of a common enemy: global communism.

Colonialism always had discernible religious overtones and often collaborated with missionary religion. "The White Man's burden" of civilizing the "savages" was widely perceived as ordained by God. The church was the extension of the colonial power's army and trading companies. It is no wonder that Hitler's lebensraum colonial movement - Nazism - possessed all the hallmarks of an institutional religion: priesthood, rites, rituals, temples, worship, catechism, mythology. Hitler was this religion's ascetic saint. He monastically denied himself earthly pleasures (or so he claimed) in order to be able to dedicate himself fully to his calling. Hitler was a monstrously inverted Jesus, sacrificing his life and denying himself so that (Aryan) humanity should benefit. By surpassing and suppressing his humanity, Hitler became a distorted version of Nietzsche's "superman".

But being a-human or super-human also means being a-sexual and a-moral. In this restricted sense, Hitler was a post-modernist and a moral relativist. He projected to the masses an androgynous figure and enhanced it by fostering the adoration of nudity and all things "natural". But what Nazism referred to as "nature" was not natural at all. It was an aesthetic of decadence and evil (though it was not perceived this way by the Nazis), carefully orchestrated, and artificial. Nazism was about reproduced copies, not about originals. It was about the manipulation of symbols - not about veritable atavism.

In short: Nazism was about theatre, not about life. To enjoy the spectacle (and be subsumed by it), Nazism demanded the suspension of judgment, depersonalization, and de-realization. Catharsis was tantamount, in Nazi dramaturgy, to self-annulment. Nazism was nihilistic not only operationally, or ideologically. Its very language and narratives were nihilistic. Nazism was conspicuous nihilism - and Hitler served as a role model, annihilating Hitler the Man, only to re-appear as Hitler the stychia.

What was the role of the Jews in all this? Nazism posed as a rebellion against the "old ways" - against the hegemonic culture, the upper classes, the established religions, the superpowers, the European order. The Nazis borrowed the Leninist vocabulary and assimilated it effectively. Hitler and the Nazis were an adolescent movement, a reaction to narcissistic injuries inflicted upon a narcissistic (and rather psychopathic) toddler nation-state. Hitler himself was a malignant narcissist, as Fromm correctly noted. The Jews constituted a perfect, easily identifiable, reification of all that was "wrong" with Europe. They were an old nation, they were eerily disembodied (without a territory), they were cosmopolitan, they were part of the establishment, they were "decadent", they were hated on religious and socio-economic grounds (see Goldhagen's "Hitler's Willing Executioners"), they were different, they were narcissistic (felt and acted as morally superior), they were everywhere, they were defenseless, they were credulous, they were adaptable (and thus could be co-opted to collaborate in their own destruction). They were the perfect hated father figure and parricide was in fashion.

This is precisely the source of the fascination with Hitler. He was an inverted human. His unconscious was his conscious. He acted out our most repressed drives, fantasies, and wishes. He provides us with a glimpse of the horrors that lie beneath the veneer, the barbarians at our personal gates, and what it was like before we invented civilization. Hitler forced us all through a time warp and many did not emerge. He was not the devil. He was one of us. He was what Arendt aptly called the banality of evil. Just an ordinary, mentally disturbed, failure, a member of a mentally disturbed and failing nation, who lived through disturbed and failing times. He was the perfect mirror, a channel, a voice, and the very depth of our souls.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: daphne on June 07, 2006, 10:40:18 AM
Quite interesting, in-law, I would have prefered to read it the normal way, though, not posted as a quote, it's much more difficult to concentrate this way!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: blackice on July 07, 2006, 04:43:15 PM
Anti-social personality disorder (what the original poster was talking about, assumedly, with their references to sociopathy) is a relatively common disorder that is often correlated with higher than average intelligence and a strongly competitive nature. It seems intuitive for the law to attract individuals diagnosable with ASP. What bugs me is the implication that sociopathy is bad.

:)

I'm not kidding. If the traits that are comorbid with sociopathy lead to sociopaths being better attorneys, and if our society wants good attorneys, then that seems like a good impetus for the ABA to start recruiting anti-social individuals. Heck, they practically do already. I'm a firm believer in Michel Foucault's outlook that diagnoses are only valuable in the context of understanding maladaptive behavior. As soon as you start making judgments about an individual's fitness from the fact that they're diagnosable - not from any specific actions the individual has undertaken - the diagnosis itself has become maladaptive from a societal standpoint.

-Ty


They have described an "evil" subtype of Narcissistic Personality Disorder that is distinguished from Psychopathy by the use of self-deception to keep the emotional consequences of his actions out of conscious awareness. A true psychopath, who does not have a conscience and does not accept morality, has no need of self-deception.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: zztop on July 10, 2006, 05:08:08 PM

Lawyers resemble very much to the ancient Jew priests who were people who lied coolly and easily, even when it is obvious they were being untruthful. It was almost impossible for them to be consistently truthful about either a major or minor issue. They lie for no apparent reason, even when it would be easier and safer to tell the truth. This is sometimes called "crazy lying". Confronting their lies may provoke an unpredictably intense rage or simply a Buddha-like smile.

Another form of lying common among ancient Jew priests leaders was known as "pseudologica fantastica," an extension of pathological lying. They tend to create a complex belief system, often about their own powers and abilities, in which they themselves sometimes get caught up. It is often difficult to determine whether the lies are an actual delusional distortion of reality or are expressed with the conscious or unconscous intent to deceive.

These manipulators are rarely original thinkers. Plagerists and thieves, they seldom credit the true originators of ideas, often coopting authorship. They are extremely convincing, forceful in the expression of their views, and talented at passing lie detector tests. For them, objective truth does not exist. The only "truth" is whatever will best achieve the outcome that meets their needs.


Amen!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: align on July 13, 2006, 01:00:27 AM



How do you do this thing? Just curious!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: jason1114 on July 13, 2006, 11:53:43 AM

Lawyers resemble very much to the ancient Jew priests who were people who lied coolly and easily, even when it is obvious they were being untruthful. It was almost impossible for them to be consistently truthful about either a major or minor issue. They lie for no apparent reason, even when it would be easier and safer to tell the truth. This is sometimes called "crazy lying". Confronting their lies may provoke an unpredictably intense rage or simply a Buddha-like smile.

Another form of lying common among ancient Jew priests leaders was known as "pseudologica fantastica," an extension of pathological lying. They tend to create a complex belief system, often about their own powers and abilities, in which they themselves sometimes get caught up. It is often difficult to determine whether the lies are an actual delusional distortion of reality or are expressed with the conscious or unconscous intent to deceive.

These manipulators are rarely original thinkers. Plagerists and thieves, they seldom credit the true originators of ideas, often coopting authorship. They are extremely convincing, forceful in the expression of their views, and talented at passing lie detector tests. For them, objective truth does not exist. The only "truth" is whatever will best achieve the outcome that meets their needs.


Amen!

Where do I sign up?
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: blackjesus on July 13, 2006, 03:52:09 PM
Pretty much anywhere there's a law school!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: i on August 14, 2006, 04:16:48 PM


Regarding attorneys with NES, it is generally the associates who have come from the very best American law schools and have had a historical pattern of academic achievement that is nothing short of extraordinary. As I am sure you can understand from the above discussion, NES is something that can actually create the sort of superachiever who shows up to work at a major law firm. In a scholastic environment-where the attorney has the luxury of choosing most of his/her courses, can work hard and get immediate feedback via grades and in conditions where the intelligence of the attorney with NES is such that he/she can perform at such a high academic level-he/she is likely to thrive. Moreover, a goal of attending law school and becoming a powerful lawyer fits in perfectly with the fantasies of the attorney with NES.

It is very easy for me to detect NES when speaking with young attorneys. An attorney with NES generally believes that he/she should be given the type of work that he/she wants. These attorneys also tend to believe that they are extremely intelligent and valuable to their employers. In addition, these sorts of attorneys tend to be very calculating and analyze most situations vis-a-vis whether or not they are getting the upper hand. If they are criticized by their employers, they may simply leave.

As a recruiter, I can tell you that I see this happening all the time. Because our firm solicits telephone calls and interest from the highest-caliber attorneys on a daily basis, the NES attorney is one of the sorts of attorneys we often speak with most frequently. The following similarities generally define the attorneys with NES I speak with:

-They generally have not worked at a "real job" before starting as a first-year associate inside a law firm;
- They generally did exceptionally well in college and attended a top-10 law school (NES, in fact, appears to be more likely the better the law school the person attended);
- They generally come from a sheltered upper-middle-class background, or their parents were academics; and,
- They generally believe they are smarter than the people they are working with.

In essence, the attorney with NES would likely never make it into a prestigious law firm had he/she not been sheltered by school, parents, and others for so long. The artificial academic environment; the home environment of privilege; the positive feedback from academic institutions, where social dynamics are not as emphasized as academic might; and the lack of prior work experience all serve to isolate the NES attorneys and allow their conditions to grow in the absence of a "real" environment. While I would be the first to argue that a law firm is not necessarily a "real" environment, it is much more so the real world than school or an upper-middle-class upbringing is.


I don't think this is a real disease in the way the guy of the article tries to present it ..
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: or honor on September 04, 2006, 05:21:42 PM
The typical law student and lawyer is hypomaniac: someome with an elevated mood, irritable, his thoughts racing, a tendency towards people-seeking, hypersexuality, grandiose thinking, religiosity, and pressured speech. Hypomania is a less severe form of mania without progression to psychosis. Many of the symptoms of mania are present, but to a lesser degree than in overt mania. People with hypomania are generally perceived as being energetic, euphoric, overflowing with new ideas, and sometimes highly confident and charismatic, and unlike full-blown mania, they are sufficiently capable of coherent thought and action to participate in everyday life.

Although hypomania sounds in many ways like a desirable condition, it can have significant downsides. Many of the negative symptoms of mania can be present; the primary differentiating factor is the absence of psychosis. Many hypomanic patients have symptoms of disrupted sleep patterns, irritability, racing thoughts, obsessional traits, and poor judgment. Hypomania, like mania, can be associated with recklessness, excessive spending, risky hypersexual activity, general lack of judgment and out-of-character behaviour that the patient may later regret and may cause significant social, interpersonal, career and financial problems.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: morpheme on September 12, 2006, 09:15:54 PM

The typical law student and lawyer is hypomaniac: someome with an elevated mood, irritable, his thoughts racing, a tendency towards people-seeking, hypersexuality, grandiose thinking, religiosity, and pressured speech. Hypomania is a less severe form of mania without progression to psychosis. Many of the symptoms of mania are present, but to a lesser degree than in overt mania. People with hypomania are generally perceived as being energetic, euphoric, overflowing with new ideas, and sometimes highly confident and charismatic, and unlike full-blown mania, they are sufficiently capable of coherent thought and action to participate in everyday life.

Although hypomania sounds in many ways like a desirable condition, it can have significant downsides. Many of the negative symptoms of mania can be present; the primary differentiating factor is the absence of psychosis. Many hypomanic patients have symptoms of disrupted sleep patterns, irritability, racing thoughts, obsessional traits, and poor judgment. Hypomania, like mania, can be associated with recklessness, excessive spending, risky hypersexual activity, general lack of judgment and out-of-character behaviour that the patient may later regret and may cause significant social, interpersonal, career and financial problems.


Sounds like someone on coke!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: einszweidrei on September 14, 2006, 05:08:40 AM

Eraprick?! How about eradick? Or or erapig?

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: benet on September 30, 2006, 07:20:23 AM
The typical lawyer is an adult whose overriding desire is to belong to a higher -- or at least, richer -- social class. We are subtly introduced to the two over-riding themes of the antisocial personality disorder (still labeled by many professional authorities "psychopathy" and "sociopathy"): an overwhelming dysphoria and an even more overweening drive to assuage this angst by belonging. The psychopath is an unhappy person. He is besieged by recurrent depression bouts, hypochondria and an overpowering sense of alienation and drift. He is bored with his own life and is permeated by a seething and explosive envy of the lucky, the mighty, the clever, the have it alls, the know it alls, the handsome, the happy - in short: his opposites. He feels discriminated against and dealt a poor hand in the great poker game called life. He is driven obsessively to right these perceived wrongs and feels entirely justified in adopting whatever means he deems necessary in pursuing this goal.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: citgo on October 03, 2006, 03:22:54 AM
Wow, benet, couln't have said it better!!!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: ruegd on March 12, 2007, 02:37:35 PM
The typical attorney doesn't fit any of our ruffian archetypes: the L.A. gang member, the Mafia hit man, the young street punk. He's now at an age when many people are described as fatherly/motherly. He is given to impulsivity and spectacular failure, irresponsible sexuality, employment and parenting, dramatic superficial displays, and a natural proclivity to bend the rules. There's usually a natural connection that binds son to parent which is easily exploited by the psychopath. The psychopathic attorney, with a brazen ability to con and manipulate, evades the legal radar screen.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: lawschoolaw on March 21, 2007, 05:37:20 PM

The typical attorney doesn't fit any of our ruffian archetypes: the L.A. gang member, the Mafia hit man, the young street punk. He's now at an age when many people are described as fatherly/motherly. He is given to impulsivity and spectacular failure, irresponsible sexuality, employment and parenting, dramatic superficial displays, and a natural proclivity to bend the rules. There's usually a natural connection that binds son to parent which is easily exploited by the psychopath. The psychopathic attorney, with a brazen ability to con and manipulate, evades the legal radar screen.


Couldn't agree more, ruegd!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: my stepson my lover on May 31, 2007, 05:00:54 AM

The typical attorney doesn't fit any of our ruffian archetypes: the L.A. gang member, the Mafia hit man, the young street punk. He's now at an age when many people are described as fatherly/motherly. He is given to impulsivity and spectacular failure, irresponsible sexuality, employment and parenting, dramatic superficial displays, and a natural proclivity to bend the rules. There's usually a natural connection that binds son to parent which is easily exploited by the psychopath. The psychopathic attorney, with a brazen ability to con and manipulate, evades the legal radar screen.


Watch "A little thing called murder" for the same traits of a woman who infected her son.

(http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/6808/imagef4ppc6.jpg)
Title: This Monday
Post by: actuate on August 18, 2007, 04:47:46 AM
(http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/4991/untitledgg2.jpg)
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: cohere on August 18, 2007, 04:48:37 PM
Thanks for letting us know, actuate. :)
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: apocryphal on August 19, 2007, 06:09:18 PM

[...] He is bored with his own life and is permeated by a seething and explosive envy of the lucky, the mighty, the clever, the have it alls, the know it alls, the handsome, the happy - in short: his opposites. [...]


You hit the @ # ! * i n g nail on the m o t h e r @ # ! * i n g head!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Red Cell on August 19, 2007, 07:35:54 PM
For all those who have read these blogs, do not attend Syracuse University College of Law.  This program has refused to deal with this behavior.  For Syracuse, it is the crying gang...

It is typically a group that has one of those personalities in it that will not stop with another person.  Law school attracts this personality type and incompetent administrators, faculty, and staff allow it continue in the school.    The profession is loathe to stop this behavior.  It becomes worse.  High salaries coupled with new social groups provide a larger network with which to destroy someone.  In fact, many will find that those psychpathic personalities are most often helped to the detriment of others.  As a group, they live to get around a person and destroy that person.  It's a brag.

"F" stands for Felony in every jurisdiction and crossing state lines makes it a federal offense but for law schools it is the "L" word Liability.  Law schools do not care what anyone does as long as they are not sued.  Go find corporate counsel, the PR group, and the dedicated donors/alums who will stop at nothing to silence all.  This may also be known as an internal investigation.         


Red Cell 

   
 
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: execrable on August 21, 2007, 08:07:29 PM
Being a psychopath isn't illegal -- in fact, some psychopaths are very successful members of society, an Ottawa lawyer argued at a dangerous offender hearing. A former Ace Crew gang member -- who as a teen was convicted of manslaughter in the death of Sylvain Leduc -- was facing a dangerous offender application following further convictions for forcible confinement, extortion and assault causing bodily harm among other raps. He has been branded a psychopath and untreatable by the Crown.

"It's a noble endeavour to treat psychopaths, but it's not expected to be successful," said Crown prosecutor Jason Neubauer, citing testimony by forensic psychiatrist Stephen Hucker that likened the personality type to an untreatable cancer. But defence lawyer Lorne Goldstein argued that while the psychopath label isn't treatable, antisocial behavior is. "There is some evidence to suggest that some judges, lawyers and CEOs do rank high on the psychopathy score," said Goldstein. "Psychopaths can't be treated -- that is the prevailing thinking -- but I have not seen a single case that says they can't be rehabilitated."
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: largess on August 24, 2007, 05:26:59 AM

Being a psychopath isn't illegal -- in fact, some psychopaths are very successful members of society, an Ottawa lawyer argued at a dangerous offender hearing. A former Ace Crew gang member -- who as a teen was convicted of manslaughter in the death of Sylvain Leduc -- was facing a dangerous offender application following further convictions for forcible confinement, extortion and assault causing bodily harm among other raps. He has been branded a psychopath and untreatable by the Crown.

"It's a noble endeavour to treat psychopaths, but it's not expected to be successful," said Crown prosecutor Jason Neubauer, citing testimony by forensic psychiatrist Stephen Hucker that likened the personality type to an untreatable cancer. But defence lawyer Lorne Goldstein argued that while the psychopath label isn't treatable, antisocial behavior is. "There is some evidence to suggest that some judges, lawyers and CEOs do rank high on the psychopathy score," said Goldstein. "Psychopaths can't be treated -- that is the prevailing thinking -- but I have not seen a single case that says they can't be rehabilitated."


It appears to be a pretty persuasive argument.
Title: Misdiagnosing Narcissism - The Bipolar I Disorder
Post by: libo on February 24, 2008, 11:24:51 AM

Many attorneys suffer from NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder).

Narcissism, in human psychology is the pattern of thinking and behaving which involves infatuation and obsession with one's self to the exclusion of others. It may be seen manifest in the chronic pursuit of personal gratification and public attention, in social dominance and personal ambition, braggadocio, insensitivity to others (lack of empathy) and/or excessive dependence on others to meet his/her responsibilities in daily living and thinking.


The manic phase of Bipolar I Disorder is often misdiagnosed as Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). Bipolar patients in the manic phase exhibit many of the signs and symptoms of pathological narcissism -- hyperactivity, self-centeredness, lack of empathy, and control freakery. During this recurring chapter of the disease, the patient is euphoric, has grandiose fantasies, spins unrealistic schemes, and has frequent rage attacks (is irritable) if her or his wishes and plans are (inevitably) frustrated. The manic phases of the bipolar disorder, however, are limited in time -- NPD is not. Furthermore, the mania is followed by -- usually protracted -- depressive episodes. The narcissist is also frequently dysphoric. But whereas the bipolar sinks into deep self-deprecation, self-devaluation, unbounded pessimism, all-pervasive guilt and anhedonia -- the narcissist, even when depressed, never forgoes his narcissism: his grandiosity, sense of entitlement, haughtiness, and lack of empathy. Narcissistic dysphorias are much shorter and reactive -- they constitute a response to the Grandiosity Gap. In plain words, the narcissist is dejected when confronted with the abyss between his inflated self-image and grandiose fantasies -- and the drab reality of his life: his failures, lack of accomplishments, disintegrating interpersonal relationships, and low status. Yet, one dose of Narcissistic Supply is enough to elevate the narcissists from the depth of misery to the heights of manic euphoria.

Not so with the bipolar. The source of her or his mood swings is assumed to be brain biochemistry -- not the availability of Narcissistic Supply. Whereas the narcissist is in full control of his faculties, even when maximally agitated, the bipolar often feels that s/he has lost control of his/her brain ("flight of ideas"), his/her speech, his/her attention span (distractibility), and his/her motor functions. The bipolar is prone to reckless behaviors and substance abuse only during the manic phase. The narcissist does drugs, drinks, gambles, shops on credit, indulges in unsafe sex or in other compulsive behaviors both when elated and when deflated. As a rule, the bipolar's manic phase interferes with his/her social and occupational functioning. Many narcissists, in contrast, reach the highest rungs of their community, church, firm, or voluntary organization. Most of the time, they function flawlessly -- though the inevitable blowups and the grating extortion of Narcissistic Supply usually put an end to the narcissist's career and social liaisons. The manic phase of bipolar sometimes requires hospitalization and -- more frequently than admitted -- involves psychotic features. Narcissists are never hospitalized as the risk for self-harm is minute.

Moreover, psychotic microepisodes in narcissism are decompensatory in nature and appear only under unendurable stress (e.g., in intensive therapy). The bipolar's mania provokes discomfort in both strangers and in the patient's nearest and dearest. His/her constant cheer and compulsive insistence on interpersonal, sexual, and occupational, or professional interactions engenders unease and repulsion. Her/his lability of mood -- rapid shifts between uncontrollable rage and unnatural good spirits -- is downright intimidating. The narcissist's gregariousness, by comparison, is calculated, "cold", controlled, and goal-orientated (the extraction of Narcissistic Supply). His cycles of mood and affect are far less pronounced and less rapid. The bipolar's swollen self-esteem, overstated self-confidence, obvious grandiosity, and delusional fantasies are akin to the narcissist's and are the source of the diagnostic confusion. Both types of patients purport to give advice, carry out an assignment, accomplish a mission, or embark on an enterprise for which they are uniquely unqualified and lack the talents, skills, knowledge, or experience required. But the bipolar's bombast is far more delusional than the narcissist's. Ideas of reference and magical thinking are common and, in this sense, the bipolar is closer to the schizotypal than to the narcissistic.

There are other differentiating symptoms:

Sleep disorders -- notably acute insomnia -- are common in the manic phase of bipolar and uncommon in narcissism. So is "manic speech" -- pressured, uninterruptible, loud, rapid, dramatic (includes singing and humorous asides), sometimes incomprehensible, incoherent, chaotic, and lasts for hours. It reflects the bipolar's inner turmoil and his/her inability to control his/her racing and kaleidoscopic thoughts. As opposed to narcissists, bipolar in the manic phase are often distracted by the slightest stimuli, are unable to focus on relevant data, or to maintain the thread of conversation. They are "all over the place" -- simultaneously initiating numerous business ventures, joining a myriad organization, writing umpteen letters, contacting hundreds of friends and perfect strangers, acting in a domineering, demanding, and intrusive manner, totally disregarding the needs and emotions of the unfortunate recipients of their unwanted attentions. They rarely follow up on their projects. The transformation is so marked that the bipolar is often described by his/her closest as "not himself/herself". Indeed, some bipolars relocate, change name and appearance, and lose contact with their "former life". Antisocial or even criminal behavior is not uncommon and aggression is marked, directed at both others (assault) and oneself (suicide). Some biploars describe an acuteness of the senses, akin to experiences recounted by drug users: smells, sounds, and sights are accentuated and attain an unearthly quality. As opposed to narcissists, bipolars regret their misdeeds following the manic phase and try to atone for their actions. They realize and accept that "something is wrong with them" and seek help. During the depressive phase they are ego-dystonic and their defenses are autoplastic (they blame themselves for their defeats, failures, and mishaps). Finally, pathological narcissism is already discernible in early adolescence. The full-fledged bipolar disorder -- including a manic phase -- rarely occurs before the age of 20. The narcissist is consistent in his pathology -- not so the bipolar. The onset of the manic episode is fast and furious and results in a conspicuous metamorphosis of the patient.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Valenta on June 10, 2008, 03:43:28 PM

-- Visionary

Contrary to popular opinion, serial killers are rarely insane or motivated by hallucinations and/or voices in their heads. Many claim to be, usually as a way of trying to get acquitted by reason of insanity. There are, however, a few genuine cases of serial killers who were compelled by such delusions.

Herbert Mullin slaughtered 13 people after voices told him that murder was necessary to prevent California from suffering an earthquake. (Mullin went to great pains to point out that California did indeed avoid an earthquake during his murder spree.)

Ed Gein claimed that by eating the corpses of women who looked like his deceased mother, he could preserve his mother's soul inside his body. He killed two women who bore passing resemblances to his mother, eating one and being apprehended while in the process of preparing the second woman's body for consumption. He also used the flesh of exhumed corpses to fashion a "woman suit" for himself so that he could "become" his mother, and carried on conversations with himself in a falsetto voice. After his arrest he was placed in a mental facility for the remainder of his life.


-- Missionary

So-called missionary killers believe that their acts are justified on the basis that they are getting rid of a certain type of person (often prostitutes or members of a certain ethnic group), and thus doing society a favor. Gary Ridgway and Aileen Wuornos are often described as missionary killers. In Wuornos' case, the victims were not prostitutes, but their patrons. Missionary killers differ from other types of serial killer in that their motive is generally non-sexual. Arguably, Jack the Ripper also fits this role.


-- Hedonistic

This type kills for the sheer pleasure of it, although what aspect they enjoy varies. Yang Xinhai's post capture statement is typical of such killers' attitudes: "When I killed people I had a desire [to kill more]. This inspired me to kill more. I don't care whether they deserve to live or not. It is none of my concern"[1]. Some killers may enjoy the actual "chase" of hunting down a victim more than anything, while others may be primarily motivated by the act of torturing and abusing the victim while they are alive. Yet others, like Jeffrey Dahmer, may kill the victim quickly, almost as if it were a chore, and then indulge in necrophilia or cannibalism with the body. Usually there is a strong sexual aspect to the crimes, even if it may not be immediately obvious, but some killers obtain a surge of excitement that is not necessarily sexual, such as Berkowitz, who got a thrill out of shooting young couples in cars at random and then running away without ever physically touching the victims.


-- Gain motivated

Most criminals who commit multiple murders for material ends (such as mob hit men) are not classed as serial killers, because they are motivated by economic gain rather than psychopathological compulsion.[citation needed] There is a fine line separating such killers, however. For example, Marcel Petiot, who operated in Nazi-occupied France, could be classified as a serial killer. He posed as a member of the French Resistance and lured wealthy Jewish people to his home, claiming he could smuggle them out of the country. Instead he murdered them and stole their belongings, killing 63 people before he was finally caught. Although Petiot's primary motivation was materialistic, few would deny that a man willing to slaughter so many people simply to acquire a few dozen suitcases of clothes and jewelry was a compulsive killer and psychopath. However, it is impossible to understand the true motivation in such cases.


-- Power/control

This is the most common serial killer. Their main objective for killing is to gain and exert power over their victim. Such killers are sometimes abused as children, which means they feel incredibly powerless and inadequate, and often they indulge in rituals that are linked, often very specifically, to forms of abuse they suffered themselves. One killer, for example, forced young girls to perform oral sex on him, after which he would spank the girl before finally strangling her. After capture, the killer claimed that when he was a child his older sister would force him to perform oral sex on her, then she would spank him in order to terrify him into not telling their parents.[citation needed] The ritual he performed with his victims would negate the humiliation he felt from his abuse as a child, although such relief would only be temporary, and like other such killers, he would soon feel compelled to repeat his actions until eventual capture. (The vast majority of child abuse victims do not become serial killers, of course, meaning that such abuse is not regarded as the sole trigger of such crimes in these cases.) Many power/control-motivated killers sexually abuse their victims, but they differ from hedonistic killers in that rape is not motivated by lust but as simply another form of dominating the victim.

Some serial killers may seem to have characteristics of more than one type. For example, British killer Peter Sutcliffe appeared to be both a visionary and a mission-oriented killer in that he claimed voices told him to clean up the streets of prostitutes.

Alternatively, another school of thought classifies motive as being one of three types: need, greed, or power.


Exactly, MacDonald! Psychological studies have shown that individuals who take pleasure in inflicting harm on animals are more likely to do so to humans. One of the known warning signs of certain psychopathologies, including anti-social personality disorder, also known as psychopathic personality disorder, is a history of torturing pets and small animals, a behavior known as zoosadism. The standard diagnostic and treatment manual for psychiatric and emotional disorders lists cruelty to animals a diagnostic criterion for conduct disorders, though it should be noted that the inclusion of animal cruelty within this standard only began with DSM-IV. A survey of psychiatric patients who had repeatedly tortured dogs and cats found all of them had high levels of aggression toward people as well, including one patient who had murdered a young boy. MacDonald Triad, indicators of violent antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. According to the studies used to form this model, cruelty to animals is a common (but not with every case) behavior in children and adolescents who grow up to become serial killers and other violent criminals.

There is some research, however, in both the UK and the U.S. that challenges the assertion that animal cruelty begets human-directed violence. Heather Piper's work, published in a 2003 article in the Journal of Social Work, posits that the presumed linkage between animal cruelty and future, human directed violence might be a "sheep in wolve's clothing." Arguing that the Human Society and other animal rights organizations have popularized the seemingly "common-sense" claim that cruelty to animals is a sort of practice for later cruelty toward humans, Lea and Stock, in a Spring 2007 Proteus: A Journal of Ideas article dispute the reliability and validity of the science that initially established this claim. MacDonald's work, for instance, was based upon very few cases and included no control group; other studies, similarly, looked only at the backgrounds of serial killers to make their claims. The reference earlier in this article to the "fact" that all of the psychiatric patients who, in one study, had reported abusing dogs or cats also reported feeling a high level of aggression toward humans was found at the Tulsa SPCA page. In fact, that study and others like it are dated and do not evidence the modern scientific standards of rigor such as including a control group.

http://people.ucsc.edu/~rglee/HW7_presentation.ppt#4

Lea's book, "Delinquency and Animal Cruelty: Myths and Realities about Social Pathology," for instance, uses a community sample (not just a sample of criminals or serial killers but a more general sample of a population of twenty-something year old Americans) to explore how common animal cruelty is among a non-institutionalized, non-criminal population and finds that 22% of males report having engaged in such acts. Additionally, Arluke et al., in a 1999 article in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence, find that, while some people are first cruel to animals and later cruel to humans, others are first cruel to humans and later to animals and still others simply alternate haphazardly between both types of cruelty. Finally, there is also evidence that some serial killers find a strong affinity to animals and never express cruelty toward animals but have no such qualms about enacting cruelty toward humans (this paradigm was also demonstrated by Hitler and others in the Nazi leadership).

http://people.howstuffworks.com/serial-killer.htm/printable
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: turn on the engine on June 10, 2008, 05:55:39 PM

Exactly, MacDonald! Psychological studies have shown that individuals who take pleasure in inflicting harm on animals are more likely to do so to humans. One of the known warning signs of certain psychopathologies, including anti-social personality disorder, also known as psychopathic personality disorder, is a history of torturing pets and small animals, a behavior known as zoosadism. The standard diagnostic and treatment manual for psychiatric and emotional disorders lists cruelty to animals a diagnostic criterion for conduct disorders, though it should be noted that the inclusion of animal cruelty within this standard only began with DSM-IV. A survey of psychiatric patients who had repeatedly tortured dogs and cats found all of them had high levels of aggression toward people as well, including one patient who had murdered a young boy. MacDonald Triad, indicators of violent antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. According to the studies used to form this model, cruelty to animals is a common (but not with every case) behavior in children and adolescents who grow up to become serial killers and other violent criminals.

There is some research, however, in both the UK and the U.S. that challenges the assertion that animal cruelty begets human-directed violence. Heather Piper's work, published in a 2003 article in the Journal of Social Work, posits that the presumed linkage between animal cruelty and future, human directed violence might be a "sheep in wolve's clothing." Arguing that the Human Society and other animal rights organizations have popularized the seemingly "common-sense" claim that cruelty to animals is a sort of practice for later cruelty toward humans, Lea and Stock, in a Spring 2007 Proteus: A Journal of Ideas article dispute the reliability and validity of the science that initially established this claim. MacDonald's work, for instance, was based upon very few cases and included no control group; other studies, similarly, looked only at the backgrounds of serial killers to make their claims. The reference earlier in this article to the "fact" that all of the psychiatric patients who, in one study, had reported abusing dogs or cats also reported feeling a high level of aggression toward humans was found at the Tulsa SPCA page. In fact, that study and others like it are dated and do not evidence the modern scientific standards of rigor such as including a control group.

http://people.ucsc.edu/~rglee/HW7_presentation.ppt#4

Lea's book, "Delinquency and Animal Cruelty: Myths and Realities about Social Pathology," for instance, uses a community sample (not just a sample of criminals or serial killers but a more general sample of a population of twenty-something year old Americans) to explore how common animal cruelty is among a non-institutionalized, non-criminal population and finds that 22% of males report having engaged in such acts. Additionally, Arluke et al., in a 1999 article in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence, find that, while some people are first cruel to animals and later cruel to humans, others are first cruel to humans and later to animals and still others simply alternate haphazardly between both types of cruelty. Finally, there is also evidence that some serial killers find a strong affinity to animals and never express cruelty toward animals but have no such qualms about enacting cruelty toward humans (this paradigm was also demonstrated by Hitler and others in the Nazi leadership).

http://people.howstuffworks.com/serial-killer.htm/printable


(http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/cd/f5/8e83a2c008a08d2fbb44a010._AA240_.L.jpg)

The "Mask of Sanity" is a book written by Hervey Cleckley, M.D., first published in 1941, describing Cleckley's clinical interviews with adult male incarcerated psychopaths. It is considered a seminal work and the most influential clinical description of psychopathy in the 20th century. The basic elements of psychopathy outlined by Cleckley are still relevant today. The title refers to the normal "mask" that conceals the mental disorder of the psychopathic person in Cleckley's conceptualization. Cleckley describes the psychopathic person as outwardly a perfect mimic of a normally functioning person, able to mask or disguise the fundamental lack of internal personality structure, an internal chaos that results in repeatedly purposeful destructive behavior, often more self-destructive than destructive to others. Despite the seemingly sincere, intelligent, even charming, external presentation, internally the psychopathic person does not have the ability to experience genuine emotions. Cleckley questions whether this mask of sanity is voluntarily assumed to intentionally hide the lack of internal structure, or if the mask hides a serious, but yet unidentified, psychiatric defect.

An expanded edition of the book was published in 1982, after the DSM, the manual used in the United States for categorizing psychiatric disorders, had changed the name and standards for the classification of psychopathy to antisocial personality disorder, incorporating most of Cleckley's 16 characteristics of a psychopath listed below. The original edition of the book is no longer available.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Pacavelli on June 11, 2008, 05:22:03 PM
Man I really regret reading this thread.  I hope I don't become crazy....crazy people don't realize that they are crazy.  Now i'm just f-ing confused.   ???

**Throws award letters in the trash**
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: premiermaw on June 14, 2008, 02:39:25 PM

Psychological studies have shown that individuals who take pleasure in inflicting harm on animals are more likely to do so to humans. One of the known warning signs of certain psychopathologies, including antisocial personality disorder, also known as psychopathic personality disorder, is a history of torturing pets and small animals, a behavior known as zoosadism.


They say people who've the fixed star Orion on their charts display zoosadism.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: A. Dawn on June 16, 2008, 02:49:45 PM
Well, if you are *really* serious about figuring out a killer's mind you've to look beyond psychopathic personalities and explore the dissociative ego states ... Fugues, amnesias, sleep-walking, sleep talking, multiple personality; and other altered state phenomena were thought to be among the manifestations of persons who employed dissociation as a repressive defense. The general notion was that a few persons, well enough developed to merit the general diagnosis of neurotic, employed dissociative mechanisms in the service of fending off unwanted or unacceptable ideas and impulses. Dissociation was formulated as a "vertical" splitting of the personality; that is, a temporal or contextual separation or walling off of one or several aspects or constellations of personality from other aspects.  Vertical splitting was thought to contrast with the more widespread concept of repressive "horizontal" splitting, that is, a separation of so-called conscious from unconscious personality manifestations or constellations.

Psychiatric Annals devoted its January, 1984 issue to a series of updated reports from prominent researchers and clinicians in this area. Donald Schafer in June, 1984 has reported on his impressions from a long-term multiple personality study group which he heads. Since that time a mushrooming literature suggests a marked increase in the frequency of multiple personality diagnosis. Most authors in one way or another attribute this increased frequency to increased sensitivity on the part of members of the therapeutic community. The effects of media information on the clinical population seem to be, "it is okay to be a multiple, there are others like me."  But some observers question even if multiple personalities exist or if the idea represents some sort of ruse people use to get off the hook for things they do. Legal implications regarding personal responsibility for activities sometimes cloud clinical issues.

The vast majority of reported cases are women (9 out of 10 or at least 4 out of 5). The chief etiological hypothesis is exposure to overwhelming experiences in early childhood, usually of a violent, intrusive sexual nature. The supposed early traumas are often reported as some form of incest perpetrated by an older male, though mothers or other women are frequently named as co- or passive collaborators. More recently multiples have claimed memories of satanic ritual abuse or abductions by space aliens. Frequent homosexual themes are said to appear in male multiple personalities and are presumed etiologically related to the maleness of the molester. No other significant etiological hypotheses tend to be cited in the literature though direct trauma or abuse often cannot be confirmed and corroborating evidence of satanic cults and alien abduction is lacking. The possibility continues to arise that, since the therapist expects to hear of early abuse, the person produces it — certainly a possibility that has been noted often enough in other kinds of therapeutic research. In the earlier literature persons with multiple personalities are generally spoken of as being exceptionally intelligent with IQ's often estimated to exceed 130, though that factor is not emphasized so much recently. High intelligence has sometimes been postulated as a key factor which kept the person from becoming seriously psychotic (Schafer, 1984).

The central dynamic universally cited is that at the moment of severe stress part of the personality defensively splits off. Altered states are said to emerge for the "purpose" of avoiding traumatic (sexual or violent) overstimulation. The effect of the split in terms of pervasiveness is said to range on a continuum from most of the person's conscious life to only occasional dissociations under conditions of severe stress in an otherwise intact personality.  Schafer (1984) states, "a personality comes into existence when the personality already in existence can no longer tolerate the world. That new personality may then be brought back in parallel emotional situations." Researchers are not altogether clear on the nature of subsequent additional splits — whether later traumas which are different in character tend to produce altered personality states compatible with the type or source of the new trauma or whether splitting simply becomes adopted as a style with later splits representing attempts to cope with other aspects of one's personality. In using the concept "defense" as a cause for splitting, researchers neglect to differentiate between "defense" meaning fending off real intrusions, and "defense" as used in the more traditional sense meaning fending off unconscious wish/fear contents or psychic conflicts of various types. The diagnostic and therapeutic approach most often described is based upon the assumption that there was, in fact, traumatic abuse and that therapeutic benefit comes through encouraging repeated abreactions related to the supposed traumas.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: A. Dawn on June 16, 2008, 02:53:53 PM
Serial murderers may well have a multiple personality structure, and an overwhelming urge to kill, which becomes unbearable and takes them over. Serial murderers, who have been interviewed, have stated that in the midst of committing murders, they felt as if their personalities had been taken over, whereby they became like witnesses to the murders they committed. An individual with multiple personality disorder has learned to deal with emotional stress by repressing traumatic memories and emotions into his unconscious mind. He'll have used defense mechanisms to create an area in it (a dissociated energy system) in which he could repress negative emotions (such as hatred, anger, and murderous urges), attitudes, and potential behavior patterns. This creates a continuous build up of these emotions, which gained strength over time as negative emotions, etc., were continuously repressed into it. It eventually developed a structure, identity, and purpose of its own. When it was needed for protection and survival, it made itself known as a hostile protector, striking back at the child's identified enemy. His Ego (basic personality) is amnesic when it makes its presence known.

If this alternate personality is about to go too far, a rescuer personality may be created to calmly deal with these negative situations, which means that three personalities are then sharing the same body. At first, these alternate personalities have a protective function towards the Ego, but after a while they may develop interests and activities of their own that the Ego knows nothing about. The defense mechanism of denial is used to ignore this reality. When specific emotions are aroused, they're triggered. Activities get done, and the Ego doesn't remember how this happened. Both serial murderers Ted Bundy and Dennis Nilsen have each referred to their alternate personality in a singular sense. Also, they've acknowledged being aware of it. In an individual with MPD, the Ego is unaware of an alternate personality that is manifesting itself. Norris (1988) states that Ted Bundy knew that he didn't have a split personality, because he knew what he was doing and where he was. He also knew that what was inside of him was a part of him. Also, there's no mention of any other helper personalities. There's only the recognition of one other personality.

Sean Hill states in, "Nurture-Born Killers: The Motivation and Personality Development of the Serial Killer," that a serial killer's mind is characterized by sociopathic features (Abrahamsen,1973), and that there are traits that are commonly found in sociopaths that overlap with traits that are commonly found in serial murderers. He states that the difference between the two may lie in the tension-reduction cycle in the methods that are chosen to reduce tension. He further states that the Nihilistic killer derives pleasure from killing, and that these motivational dynamics are characterized by patterns that correspond to the adult serial murderer, who kills many victims over a period of time for no apparent motive other than that of satisfaction and the release of tension (Hill, 1994). Hill goes on to state that Liebert (1985) suggested that a serial murderer is the product of very primitive emotions, and that violent and impulsive sexual behavior is the organizing force behind his personality. In the serial murderer, the pleasure principle takes the dominant role in personality development, and hate and revenge become fused, which causes the serial murderer to see the world in psychopathic colors (Hill, 1994).

Travis Hirschi's, "Social Bond Theory," (A Social Control Theory) focuses on how individuals bond to society. An individual develops social consciousness depending on the quality of his attachments to others (his interest in others). According to this theory, if the individual's attachment to society is weak, he/she may defy the moral codes of his/her society. Research has demonstrated support for aspects of, "Social Bond Theory." The FBI had agents conduct interviews on a subsample of 36 sexual serial murderers who were selected for gaining insight into the development of profiling strategies. It was discovered that their early attachments to significant others showed a general lack of bonding with them, which characterized how they related to bonding with others later in life. The men in the study experienced low social attachments, and they felt detached from family members and peers. Also, they didn't experience the forms of bonding through which people develop empathy towards others. As a child, a serial murderer used fantasy to escape from a negative family environment. In the fantasy, he entered into a world that he was in control of. One in which he acted out abuse against others, rather than being the target of it. These fantasies gave him feelings of perceived control, and they came to be his primary source of emotional arousal. These fantasies later structured his multicidal activities, as a kind of architecture, in which he could experience an environment that he could fulfill his multicidal motivations in. When these factors are combined with aspects of bonding theory, a structuring process develops that informs later multicidal behavioral patterns. These factors are significant, but they're only a part of the puzzle in the etiology of a serial murderer.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: harrisons on June 18, 2008, 11:02:19 AM

Well, if you are *really* serious about figuring out a killer's mind you've to look beyond psychopathic personalities and explore the dissociative ego states ...


So that's what this "killing" stuff is all about - figuring out the killer's mind, how it works and so on - are you guys writing some kind of paper or is some kind of more elaborate work you've doing? A novel, maybe, like Catherine Tramel of Basic Instinct? :)
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: mayo on June 27, 2008, 11:23:57 AM

Psychological studies have shown that individuals who take pleasure in inflicting harm on animals are more likely to do so to humans. One of the known warning signs of certain psychopathologies, including antisocial personality disorder, also known as psychopathic personality disorder, is a history of torturing pets and small animals, a behavior known as zoosadism.


They say people who've the fixed star Orion on their charts display zoosadism.


There's no fixed star called "Orion" - traditional astrology uses a small number of stars. Most modern astrologers lean to a very small orb (1 degree - one finger's width). They allow a larger orb especially for the 4 Royal Stars, Aldebaran, Regulus, Antares and Fomalhaut, plus Sirius and Spica. Caput Algol is also allowed a larger orb, because it is such a powerful influence for evil.

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: we are watching you on July 02, 2008, 11:09:30 AM

There's no fixed star called "Orion" - traditional astrology uses a small number of stars. Most modern astrologers lean to a very small orb (1 degree - one finger's width). They allow a larger orb especially for the 4 Royal Stars, Aldebaran, Regulus, Antares and Fomalhaut, plus Sirius and Spica. Caput Algol is also allowed a larger orb, because it is such a powerful influence for evil.


Interesting - could you expand a bit?
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: doubtie on July 08, 2008, 06:03:51 AM

Psychological studies have shown that individuals who take pleasure in inflicting harm on animals are more likely to do so to humans. One of the known warning signs of certain psychopathologies, including antisocial personality disorder, also known as psychopathic personality disorder, is a history of torturing pets and small animals, a behavior known as zoosadism.


They say people who've the fixed star Orion on their charts display zoosadism.


There's no fixed star called "Orion" - traditional astrology uses a small number of stars. Most modern astrologers lean to a very small orb (1 degree - one finger's width). They allow a larger orb especially for the 4 Royal Stars, Aldebaran, Regulus, Antares and Fomalhaut, plus Sirius and Spica. Caput Algol is also allowed a larger orb, because it is such a powerful influence for evil.


Orion is a constellation often referred to as The Hunter; it is a prominent constellation, one of the largest and perhaps the best-known and most conspicuous in the sky. Its brilliant stars are found on the celestial equator and are visible throughout the world.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: paymen on October 16, 2008, 07:31:49 PM

Well, if you are *really* serious about figuring out a killer's mind you've to look beyond psychopathic personalities and explore the dissociative ego states ...


So that's what this "killing" stuff is all about - figuring out the killer's mind, how it works and so on - are you guys writing some kind of paper or is some kind of more elaborate work you've doing? A novel, maybe, like Catherine Tramel of Basic Instinct? :)


A dissertation, maybe? :)
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: a g a p e on October 24, 2008, 08:14:26 PM
There's evidence that the business climate has become even more hospitable to psychopaths in recent years. In pioneering long-term studies of psychopaths in the workplace, New York industrial psychologist Paul Babiak focused on a half-dozen unnamed companies: One was a fast-growing high-tech firm, and the others were large multinationals undergoing dramatic organizational changes -- severe downsizing, restructuring, mergers and acquisitions, and joint ventures. That's just the sort of corporate tumult that has increasingly characterized the U.S. business landscape in the last couple of decades. And just as wars can produce exciting opportunities for murderous psychopaths to shine (think of Serbia's Slobodan Milosevic and Radovan Karadzic), Babiak found that these organizational shake-ups created a welcoming environment for the corporate killer. "The psychopath has no difficulty dealing with the consequences of rapid change; in fact, he or she thrives on it," Babiak claims. "Organizational chaos provides both the necessary stimulation for psychopathic thrill seeking and sufficient cover for psychopathic manipulation and abusive behavior."

And you can make a compelling case that the New Economy, with its rule-breaking and roller-coaster results, is just dandy for folks with psychopathic traits too. A slow-moving old-economy corporation would be too boring for a psychopath, who needs constant stimulation. Its rigid structures and processes and predictable ways might stymie his unethical scheming. But a charge-ahead New Economy maverick -- an Enron, for instance -- would seem the ideal place for this kind of operator. But how can we recognize psychopathic types? Hare has revised his Psychopathy Checklist (known as the PCL-R, or simply "the Hare") to make it easier to identify so-called subcriminal or corporate psychopaths. He has broken down the 20 personality characteristics into two subsets, or "factors." Corporate psychopaths score high on Factor 1, the "selfish, callous, and remorseless use of others" category. It includes eight traits: glibness and superficial charm; grandiose sense of self-worth; pathological lying; conning and manipulativeness; lack of remorse or guilt; shallow affect (i.e., a coldness covered up by dramatic emotional displays that are actually playacting); callousness and lack of empathy; and the failure to accept responsibility for one's own actions. Sound like anyone you know? (Corporate psychopaths score only low to moderate on Factor 2, which pinpoints "chronically unstable, antisocial, and socially deviant lifestyle," the hallmarks of people who wind up in jail for rougher crimes than creative accounting.)

This view is supported by research by psychologists Belinda Board and Katarina Fritzon at the University of Surrey, who interviewed and gave personality tests to 39 high-level British executives and compared their profiles with those of criminals and psychiatric patients. The executives were even more likely to be superficially charming, egocentric, insincere, and manipulative, and just as likely to be grandiose, exploitative, and lacking in empathy. Board and Fritzon concluded that the businesspeople they studied might be called "successful psychopaths." In contrast, the criminals -- the "unsuccessful psychopaths" -- were more impulsive and physically aggressive. The Factor 1 psychopathic traits seem like the playbook of many corporate power brokers through the decades. Manipulative? Louis B. Mayer was said to be a better actor than any of the stars he employed at MGM, able to turn on the tears at will to evoke sympathy during salary negotiations with his actors. Callous? Henry Ford hired thugs to crush union organizers, deployed machine guns at his plants, and stockpiled tear gas. He cheated on his wife with his teenage personal assistant and then had the younger woman marry his chauffeur as a cover. Lacking empathy? Hotel magnate Leona Helmsley shouted profanities at and summarily fired hundreds of employees allegedly for trivialities, like a maid missing a piece of lint. Remorseless? Soon after Martin Davis ascended to the top position at Gulf & Western, a visitor asked why half the offices were empty on the top floor of the company's Manhattan skyscraper. "Those were my enemies," Davis said. "I got rid of them." Deceitful? Oil baron Armand Hammer laundered money to pay for Soviet espionage. Grandiosity? Thy name is Trump.

In the most recent wave of scandals, Enron's Fastow displayed many of the corporate psychopath's traits. He pressured his bosses for a promotion to CFO even though he had a shaky grasp of the position's basic responsibilities, such as accounting and treasury operations. Suffering delusions of grandeur after just a little time on the job, Fastow ordered Enron's PR people to lobby CFO magazine to make him its CFO of the Year. But Fastow's master manipulation was a scheme to loot Enron. He set up separate partnerships, secretly run by himself, to engage in deals with Enron. The deals quickly made tens of millions of dollars for Fastow -- and prettified Enron's financials in the short run by taking unwanted assets off its books. But they left Enron with time bombs that would ultimately cause the company's total implosion -- and lose shareholders billions. When Enron's scandals were exposed, Fastow pleaded guilty to securities fraud and agreed to pay back nearly $24 million and serve 10 years in prison.

"Chainsaw" Al Dunlap might score impressively on the corporate Psychopathy Checklist too. What do you say about a guy who didn't attend his own parents' funerals? He allegedly threatened his first wife with guns and knives. She charged that he left her with no food and no access to their money while he was away for days. His divorce was granted on grounds of "extreme cruelty." That's the characteristic that endeared him to Wall Street, which applauded when he fired 11,000 workers at Scott Paper, then another 6,000 (half the labor force) at Sunbeam. Chainsaw hurled a chair at his human-resources chief, the very man who approved the handgun and bulletproof vest on his expense report. Dunlap needed the protection because so many people despised him. His plant closings kept up his reputation for ruthlessness but made no sense economically, and Sunbeam's financial gains were really the result of Dunlap's alleged book cooking. When he was finally exposed and booted, Dunlap had the nerve to demand severance pay and insist that the board reprice his stock options. Talk about failure to accept responsibility for one's own actions.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: CoQ10 on November 13, 2008, 02:31:23 PM
Anti-social personality disorder (what the original poster was talking about, assumedly, with their references to sociopathy) is a relatively common disorder that is often correlated with higher than average intelligence and a strongly competitive nature.  It seems intuitive for the law to attract individuals diagnosable with ASP.  What bugs me is the implication that sociopathy is bad.

:)

I'm not kidding.  If the traits that are comorbid with sociopathy lead to sociopaths being better attorneys, and if our society wants good attorneys, then that seems like a good impetus for the ABA to start recruiting anti-social individuals.  Heck, they practically do already.  I'm a firm believer in Michel Foucault's outlook that diagnoses are only valuable in the context of understanding maladaptive behavior.  As soon as you start making judgments about an individual's fitness from the fact that they're diagnosable - not from any specific actions the individual has undertaken - the diagnosis itself has become maladaptive from a societal standpoint.

-Ty


The Antisocial Personality Disorder is a controversial mental health diagnoses. The psychopath refuses to conform to social norms and obey the law. He often inflicts pain and damage on his victims. But does that make this pattern of conduct a mental illness? The psychopath has no conscience or empathy. But is this necessarily pathological? Culture-bound diagnoses are often abused as tools of social control. They allow the establishment, ruling elites, and groups with vested interests to label and restrain dissidents and troublemakers. Such diagnoses are frequently employed by totalitarian states to harness or even eliminate eccentrics, criminals, and deviants.

Psychopathy is frequently co-morbid with other psychological disorders (particularly narcissistic personality disorder). Many psychologists believe that psychopathy falls on a spectrum of pathological narcissism, ranging from narcissistic personality disorder on the low end, malignant narcissism in the middle, and psychopathy on the high end.

Like narcissists, psychopaths lack empathy and regard other people as mere instruments of gratification and utility or as objects to be manipulated. Psychopaths and narcissists have no problem to grasp ideas and to formulate choices, needs, preferences, courses of action, and priorities. But they are shocked when other people do the very same. Most people accept that others have rights and obligations. The psychopath rejects this quid pro quo. As far as he is concerned, only might is right. People have no rights and he, the psychopath, has no obligations that derive from the "social contract." The psychopath holds himself to be above conventional morality and the law. The psychopath cannot delay gratification. He wants everything and wants it now. His whims, urges, catering to his needs, and the satisfaction of his drives take precedence over the needs, preferences, and emotions of even his nearest and dearest.

Consequently, psychopaths feel no remorse when they hurt or defraud others. They don't possess even the most rudimentary conscience. They rationalize their (often criminal) behavior and intellectualize it. Psychopaths fall prey to their own primitive defense mechanisms (such as narcissism, splitting, and projection). The psychopath firmly believes that the world is a hostile, merciless place, prone to the survival of the fittest and that people are either "all good" or "all evil". The psychopath projects his own vulnerabilities, weaknesses, and shortcomings unto others and force them to behave the way he expects them to (this defense mechanism is known as "projective identification"). Like narcissists, psychopaths are abusively exploitative and incapable of true love or intimacy.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Master of Ceremonies on December 07, 2008, 03:58:18 PM

Well, if you are *really* serious about figuring out a killer's mind you've to look beyond psychopathic personalities and explore the dissociative ego states ... Fugues, amnesias, sleep-walking, sleep talking, multiple personality; and other altered state phenomena were thought to be among the manifestations of persons who employed dissociation as a repressive defense. The general notion was that a few persons, well enough developed to merit the general diagnosis of neurotic, employed dissociative mechanisms in the service of fending off unwanted or unacceptable ideas and impulses. Dissociation was formulated as a "vertical" splitting of the personality; that is, a temporal or contextual separation or walling off of one or several aspects or constellations of personality from other aspects.  Vertical splitting was thought to contrast with the more widespread concept of repressive "horizontal" splitting, that is, a separation of so-called conscious from unconscious personality manifestations or constellations.

Psychiatric Annals devoted its January, 1984 issue to a series of updated reports from prominent researchers and clinicians in this area. Donald Schafer in June, 1984 has reported on his impressions from a long-term multiple personality study group which he heads. Since that time a mushrooming literature suggests a marked increase in the frequency of multiple personality diagnosis. Most authors in one way or another attribute this increased frequency to increased sensitivity on the part of members of the therapeutic community. The effects of media information on the clinical population seem to be, "it is okay to be a multiple, there are others like me."  But some observers question even if multiple personalities exist or if the idea represents some sort of ruse people use to get off the hook for things they do. Legal implications regarding personal responsibility for activities sometimes cloud clinical issues.

The vast majority of reported cases are women (9 out of 10 or at least 4 out of 5). The chief etiological hypothesis is exposure to overwhelming experiences in early childhood, usually of a violent, intrusive sexual nature. The supposed early traumas are often reported as some form of incest perpetrated by an older male, though mothers or other women are frequently named as co- or passive collaborators. More recently multiples have claimed memories of satanic ritual abuse or abductions by space aliens. Frequent homosexual themes are said to appear in male multiple personalities and are presumed etiologically related to the maleness of the molester. No other significant etiological hypotheses tend to be cited in the literature though direct trauma or abuse often cannot be confirmed and corroborating evidence of satanic cults and alien abduction is lacking. The possibility continues to arise that, since the therapist expects to hear of early abuse, the person produces it — certainly a possibility that has been noted often enough in other kinds of therapeutic research. In the earlier literature persons with multiple personalities are generally spoken of as being exceptionally intelligent with IQ's often estimated to exceed 130, though that factor is not emphasized so much recently. High intelligence has sometimes been postulated as a key factor which kept the person from becoming seriously psychotic (Schafer, 1984).

The central dynamic universally cited is that at the moment of severe stress part of the personality defensively splits off. Altered states are said to emerge for the "purpose" of avoiding traumatic (sexual or violent) overstimulation. The effect of the split in terms of pervasiveness is said to range on a continuum from most of the person's conscious life to only occasional dissociations under conditions of severe stress in an otherwise intact personality.  Schafer (1984) states, "a personality comes into existence when the personality already in existence can no longer tolerate the world. That new personality may then be brought back in parallel emotional situations." Researchers are not altogether clear on the nature of subsequent additional splits — whether later traumas which are different in character tend to produce altered personality states compatible with the type or source of the new trauma or whether splitting simply becomes adopted as a style with later splits representing attempts to cope with other aspects of one's personality. In using the concept "defense" as a cause for splitting, researchers neglect to differentiate between "defense" meaning fending off real intrusions, and "defense" as used in the more traditional sense meaning fending off unconscious wish/fear contents or psychic conflicts of various types. The diagnostic and therapeutic approach most often described is based upon the assumption that there was, in fact, traumatic abuse and that therapeutic benefit comes through encouraging repeated abreactions related to the supposed traumas.


Well, for the sake of truth, A.Dawn, if you are really serious about figuring out the killer's mind you DON'T have to look beyond psychopathic personalities. It is by now settled that The Temperament is a very important determinant of killing behavior (although one of the most difficult areas to research). However, Swank & Marchand did propose the existence of 2% of combat soldiers who are predisposed to be "aggressive psychopaths" and who apparently do not experience the trauma commonly associated with killing behavior. What these individuals represent -- and this is a terribly important point that we must emphasize -- is the capacity for the levelheaded participation in combat that we as a society glorify and that Hollywood would have us believe that all soldiers possess. Dyer's World War II figure of 1% of U.S. Army Air Corps fighter pilots being responsible for 40% of all kills is also generally in keeping with the Swank & Marchand estimates. Erich Hartmann, the World War II German ace -- unquestionably the greatest fighter pilot of all time, with 351 confirmed victories -- claimed that 80% of his victims never knew he was in the same sky with them. This claim, if accurate, provides a remarkable insight into the nature of such a killer. Like the kills of most successful snipers and fighter pilots, the vast majority of the killing done by these men were what some would call simple ambushes, and back shootings. No provocation, anger, or emotion empowered these killings.

Perhaps there is another analogy. According to Carl Jung, there are deeply ingrained models of behavior called archetypes that exist deep in every human's unconscious -- an inhereted unconscious reservoir of images derived from our ancestors' universal experiences and shared by the whole human race. These powerful archetypes can drive us by channeling our libidinal energy. They include such Jungian concepts as the mother, the wise old man, the hero, and the warrior. Jung could have referred to these individuals as "warriors." Nevertheless, a veteran quoted by Dyer shows a deep understanding of the tremendous pressures many factors place on the ordinary basically decent soldier:

Quote
You put those same kids in the jungle for a while, get them real scared, deprive them of sleep, and let a few incidents change some of their fears to hate. Give them a sergeant who has seen too many of his men killed by booby traps and by lack of distrust and who feels that Vietnamese are dumb, dirty, and weak, because they are not like him. Add a little mob pressure, and these nice kids who accompany us today would rape like champions. Kill, rape and steal is the name of the game."
Title: The Cyberbully
Post by: l a w s c h o o l d i s c on May 13, 2009, 10:15:30 AM

How about an Attention-Seeker plus The Wannabe plus The Guru AND The Sociopath?


The Internet provides the perfect forum for cyberbullies, individuals whose aim is to gain gratification from the distress caused by provoking and tormenting others. The anonymity, ease of provocation, and almost infinite source of targets means the Internet is full of predators from pedophiles targeting children to serial bullies targeting ... anybody. Cyberbullies get a perverse sense of satisfaction (called gratification) from sending people flame mail and hate mail. Flame mail is an email whose contents are designed to inflame and enrage. Hate mail is hatred (including prejudice, racism, sexism etc) in an email.

Serial bullies harbour a lot of internal aggression which they direct at others. This may include projection, false criticism and patronizing sarcasm whilst contributing nothing of any value. It may also include a common tactic of "a number of people have emailed me backchannel to agree with me." In every case it's a fabrication or a distortion - usually the former. It's also a variant of the serial bully head teacher who says "a number of parents have complained to me about you..." When challenged, the identity of the alleged complainants can't be disclosed because it's "confidential."

The method of creating conflict is provocation which bullies delight in because they know they can always coerce at least one person to respond in a manner which can then be distorted and used to further flame and inflame people. And so it goes on. The bully then sits back and gains gratification from seeing others engage in destructive behavior towards each other. This is known as trolling. Most serial bullies are also serial attention-seekers. More than anything else they want attention. It doesn't matter what type of attention they get, positive or negative, as long as they can provoke someone into paying them attention. It's like a 2-year-old child throwing a tantrum to get attention from a parent. The best way to treat bullies is to refuse to respond and to refuse to engage them - which they really hate. In other words, do not reply to their postings, and on forums carry on posting without reference to their postings as if they didn't exist. In other words, treat nobodies as nobodies. The purpose of this tactic is to wind people up. Don't be fooled into believing it has any validity - it doesn't. People who bully are adept at creating conflict between those who would otherwise pool negative information about them.

The anger of a serial bully is especially apparent when they come across someone who can see through them to espy the weak, inadequate, immature, dysfunctional aggressive individual behind the mask. If you receive abusive posts or hate mail from someone on the boards, use the 'report this post' function. If you are receiving persistent abusive emails , forward them to abuse@isp where "isp" is the service provider the abuser is using, eg "aol.com" or "yahoo.com". Although Internet service providers may not act on every complaint, the more complaints they receive about a particular individual (with examples of abusive email) the more likely they are to close down the person's account. The objectives of bullies are Power, Control, Domination, Subjugation. They get a kick out of seeing you react. It doesn't matter how you react, the fact they've successful provoked a reaction is, to the bully, a sign that their attempt at control have been successful. After that, it's a question of wearing you down. The more your try to explain, negotiate, conciliate, etc the more gratification they obtain from your increasingly desperate attempts to communicate with them. Understand that it is not possible to communicate in a mature adult manner with a disordered individual who's emotionally retarded.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: L.B. on November 15, 2011, 07:52:12 PM

[...] Like the kills of most successful snipers and fighter pilots, the vast majority of the killing done by these men were what some would call simple ambushes, and back shootings. No provocation, anger, or emotion empowered these killings.

[...]


But of course - these are the kinds of nihilistic killers - there is a movie "Mr. Brooks" which depicts a guy who killed people for the hell of it..
Title: Re: The Cyberbully
Post by: Poni on November 18, 2011, 09:31:36 PM

How about an Attention-Seeker plus The Wannabe plus The Guru AND The Sociopath?


[...] The anonymity, ease of provocation, and almost infinite source of targets means the Internet is full of predators from pedophiles targeting children to serial bullies targeting ... anybody. [...]

[...]

[...] The bully then sits back and gains gratification from seeing others engage in destructive behavior towards each other. This is known as trolling. Most serial bullies are also serial attention-seekers. More than anything else they want attention. It doesn't matter what type of attention they get, positive or negative, as long as they can provoke someone into paying them attention. It's like a 2-year-old child throwing a tantrum to get attention from a parent. The best way to treat bullies is to refuse to respond and to refuse to engage them - which they really hate. [...] In other words, treat nobodies as nobodies. [...]

[...] The objectives of bullies are Power, Control, Domination, Subjugation. They get a kick out of seeing you react. It doesn't matter how you react, the fact they've successful provoked a reaction is, to the bully, a sign that their attempt at control have been successful. After that, it's a question of wearing you down. The more your try to explain, negotiate, conciliate, etc the more gratification they obtain from your increasingly desperate attempts to communicate with them. Understand that it is not possible to communicate in a mature adult manner with a disordered individual who's emotionally retarded.


Awesome - could you expand a bit?
Title: Self-Fulfilling Prophecies
Post by: Violet Bear on November 22, 2011, 01:25:01 PM

[...] People have no rights and he, the psychopath, has no obligations that derive from the "social contract." The psychopath holds himself to be above conventional morality and the law. The psychopath cannot delay gratification. He wants everything and wants it now. His whims, urges, catering to his needs, and the satisfaction of his drives take precedence over the needs, preferences, and emotions of even his nearest and dearest.

Consequently, psychopaths feel no remorse when they hurt or defraud others. They don't possess even the most rudimentary conscience. They rationalize their (often criminal) behavior and intellectualize it. Psychopaths fall prey to their own primitive defense mechanisms (such as narcissism, splitting, and projection). [...] The psychopath projects his own vulnerabilities, weaknesses, and shortcomings unto others and force them to behave the way he expects them to (this defense mechanism is known as "projective identification") [...]


As to the mechanism you mention - I have read about a similar concept in social psychology - that of self-fulfilling prophecy, a process in which we find confirmation and proof for our stereotypes by creating stereotypical behavior in out-group members through our treatment of them. Word, Zanna & Cooper in 1974 conducted a set of experiments that shows such. In the first study, they asked white students to interview job applicants who were either white or black. The students tended to display discomfort when interviewing the blacks; for instance, they sat further away, stammered, and ended the interview earlier. In a second study, the researchers varied the behavior of the student interviewers so that the latter acted towards a job applicant either the way that the interviewers had acted towards whites or the way they had acted towards blacks in the first study. They found that those applicants who had been interviewed in the way that blacks had been interviewed were judged to be more nervous and less effective than the others.
Title: Re: PI
Post by: the-Q-card on November 27, 2011, 02:26:03 AM

[...] People have no rights and he, the psychopath, has no obligations that derive from the "social contract." The psychopath holds himself to be above conventional morality and the law. The psychopath cannot delay gratification. He wants everything and wants it now. His whims, urges, catering to his needs, and the satisfaction of his drives take precedence over the needs, preferences, and emotions of even his nearest and dearest.

Consequently, psychopaths feel no remorse when they hurt or defraud others. They don't possess even the most rudimentary conscience. They rationalize their (often criminal) behavior and intellectualize it. Psychopaths fall prey to their own primitive defense mechanisms (such as narcissism, splitting, and projection). [...] The psychopath projects his own vulnerabilities, weaknesses, and shortcomings unto others and force them to behave the way he expects them to (this defense mechanism is known as "projective identification") [...]


As to the mechanism you mention - I have read about a similar concept in social psychology - that of self-fulfilling prophecy, a process in which we find confirmation and proof for our stereotypes by creating stereotypical behavior in out-group members through our treatment of them. Word, Zanna & Cooper in 1974 conducted a set of experiments that shows such. In the first study, they asked white students to interview job applicants who were either white or black. The students tended to display discomfort when interviewing the blacks; for instance, they sat further away, stammered, and ended the interview earlier. In a second study, the researchers varied the behavior of the student interviewers so that the latter acted towards a job applicant either the way that the interviewers had acted towards whites or the way they had acted towards blacks in the first study. They found that those applicants who had been interviewed in the way that blacks had been interviewed were judged to be more nervous and less effective than the others.


No kidding, Violet Bear - PI appears to be "the man" - here it is a related post on how groups rely on the phenomenon to function


Fight/Flight mentality and the choice of a leader in the Fight/Flight group

As to the choice of a leader for a fight/flight group, Bion says:

Quote
"It is usually a man or woman with marked paranoid trends; perhaps, if the presence of an enemy is not immediately obvious to the group, the next best thing is for the group to choose a leader to whom it is."
 

This statement is important for several reasons. First, it makes it obvious that, according to Bion, it is not the leader who chooses his group -- neither according to his own needs or his perception of the group's needs -- but much more the basic assumption group which seeks and chooses its appropriate leader according to its (unconscious) needs. And second, the group's need to find an enemy, against whom they can either fight or from which they can flee, exists even before that enemy has been found, discovered or, indeed, invented. In other words, one might say, that if the Jews hadn't been there already for the Nazis to identify as the enemy, responsible for their miserable plight, the Nazis would have had to invent them! And as for the leadership role in this fight/flight dynamic, the German people were highly successful in picking a personality from among their ranks (who was, of course not even a German, but an Austrian!), and whose capacities as a leader of the fight/flight basic assumption have remained virtually unparalleled in history, Adolph Hitler. According to Bion, leadership is a product of the group mentality, not its origin. He writes:

Quote
The leader, on the basic assumption level, does not create the group by virtue of his fanatical adherence to an idea, but is rather an individual whose personality renders him peculiarly susceptible to the obliteration of individuality by the basic group's leadership requirements.

And here Bion links this phenomenon with the Kleinian theory of projective identification:

Quote
To me the leader is as much the creature of the basic assumption as any other member of the group, and this, I think, is to be expected if we envisage identification of the individual with the leader as depending not on introjection alone but on a simultaneous process of projective identification.


This "loss of individual distinctiveness" applies to the leader as much as to anyone else.

Thus the leader in the fight/flight group, for example, appears to have a distinctive personality because his personality is of a kind that lends itself to exploitation by the group demand for a leader who requires of it only a capacity for fighting or for flight; the leader has no greater freedom to be himself than any other member of the group. Bion compares this leader with

Quote
"an automaton who has ceased to be guided by his own will. He is leader by virtue of his capacity for instantaneous, involuntary combination with every other member of his group and only differs from them in that, whatever his function in the work group, he is the incarnation of the basic assumption group leader.


Bion points out that it is incapable of tolerating frustration in the long run, because in the sphere of basic assumption phenomena, time itself is not a relevant, not even an existent dimension of reality. Flight offers an immediately available opportunity for expression of the emotion in the fight/flight group and therefore meets the demand for instantaneous satisfaction -- therefore the group will take flight. Alternatively, attack offers a similarly immediate outlet -- then the group will fight. The fight/flight group will follow any leader who will give such orders as license instantaneous flight or instantaneous attack.

[...]

Containment as a leadership style -- where does it come from?

How containing the style of the leader and how given to blaming others when things go wrong (paranoid/schizoid position) versus acknowledging one's or one's institution's contribution towards the trouble one is in (depressive position), depends to a very large degree on the individual's capacity to maintain a relatively mature stance as opposed to falling into a defensive/paranoid one, and this capacity is based on early experiences and their later reworking as the life-cycle progresses. The assumption underlying this aspect of psychoanalytic theory suggests that the conditions necessary in order for a proper Container-Contained relationship in the Bionic sense to come into being are:

a) when an individual has him/herself had sufficient experience of containment in the course of his or her personal development, and
b) when s/he has thereby developed a capacity to identify both with the container as well as with "being contained" and then, through the process of introjective identification, has been able to include this as a significant and stable aspect of his or her own internal life.

This developmental process thus enables one to increase one's capacity to contain, and to employ containment of anxiety as a psychic tool, which can then be utilised as necessary in the authoritative execution of leadership roles.

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: zanna on December 26, 2011, 11:59:21 PM

[...] They are often convinced that the celebrity is sending them cryptic messages intended only for them to understand. Erotomanic delusions last an average of 10 years.


I can just imagine what hell the chased person must have gone through during those 10 years!


Horrible indeed! The core of the syndrome is that the affected person has a delusional belief that another person, usually of higher social status, is secretly in love with them. The sufferer may also believe that the subject of their delusion secretly communicates their love by subtle methods such as body posture, arrangement of household objects and other seemingly innocuous acts (or, if the person is a public figure, through clues in the media). The object of the delusion usually has little or no contact with the delusional person, who often believes that the object initiated the fictional relationship. Erotomanic delusions are typically found as the primary symptom of delusional disorder, or in the context of schizophrenia.

Occasionally the subject of the delusion may not actually exist, although more commonly, the subjects are media figures such as popular singers, actors and politicians. Erotomania has been cited as one cause for stalking or harassment campaigns. The assassination attempt of Ronald Reagan by John Hinckley, Jr. was reported to have been driven by an erotomanic delusion that the death of the president would cause actress Jodie Foster to publicly declare her love for Hinckley. Late night comedian David Letterman and retired astronaut Story Musgrave were the targets of delusional Margaret Mary Ray. Other reported celebrity targets of erotomania include Madonna, Steven Spielberg, Zachary Quinto, Britney Spears, Barbara Mandrell, and Linda Ronstadt.


Delusional Disorder is indeed horrible - I remember some years ago when my neighbor, a twenty-nine-years old male, approached the authorities (the police) and asked them for protection; he told them his life was in danger because of a group of individuals who were following and harassing him on a daily basis for over a year or so. His wife told the police no actual threat had been made by anyone. He was functioning rather satisfactorily in work and his social relations and did not appear to have any other complaints. The police believed him initially and had several people watch him for a time period, only to discover that no one was, in actuality, following the guy. He was referred for psychiatric evaluation and found to suffer from delusional disorder.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: R Deutch on December 27, 2011, 01:53:00 AM

[...] And just as wars can produce exciting opportunities for murderous psychopaths to shine (think of Serbia's Slobodan Milosevic and Radovan Karadzic), Babiak found that these organizational shake-ups created a welcoming environment for the corporate killer. "The psychopath has no difficulty dealing with the consequences of rapid change; in fact, he or she thrives on it," Babiak claims. "Organizational chaos provides both the necessary stimulation for psychopathic thrill seeking and sufficient cover for psychopathic manipulation and abusive behavior."

[...] Hare has revised his Psychopathy Checklist (known as the PCL-R, or simply "the Hare") to make it easier to identify so-called subcriminal or corporate psychopaths. He has broken down the 20 personality characteristics into two subsets, or "factors." Corporate psychopaths score high on Factor 1, the "selfish, callous, and remorseless use of others" category. [...] Sound like anyone you know? (Corporate psychopaths score only low to moderate on Factor 2, which pinpoints "chronically unstable, antisocial, and socially deviant lifestyle," the hallmarks of people who wind up in jail for rougher crimes than creative accounting.)

[...] Manipulative? Louis B. Mayer was said to be a better actor than any of the stars he employed at MGM, able to turn on the tears at will to evoke sympathy during salary negotiations with his actors. Callous? Henry Ford hired thugs to crush union organizers, deployed machine guns at his plants, and stockpiled tear gas. He cheated on his wife with his teenage personal assistant and then had the younger woman marry his chauffeur as a cover. Lacking empathy? Hotel magnate Leona Helmsley shouted profanities at and summarily fired hundreds of employees allegedly for trivialities, like a maid missing a piece of lint. [...]


Extremely interesting zanna .. could you pls expand a lil bit on this "corporate killer"?  :)
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Lovdie on December 28, 2011, 09:24:39 PM

Delusional Disorder is indeed horrible - I remember some years ago when my neighbor, a twenty-nine-years old male, approached the authorities (the police) and asked them for protection; he told them his life was in danger because of a group of individuals who were following and harassing him on a daily basis for over a year or so. His wife told the police no actual threat had been made by anyone. He was functioning rather satisfactorily in work and his social relations and did not appear to have any other complaints. The police believed him initially and had several people watch him for a time period, only to discover that no one was, in actuality, following the guy. He was referred for psychiatric evaluation and found to suffer from delusional disorder.


Hello zanna - here it is an interesting post on paranoia (delusional disorders)


By definition, projection dominates the psychology of the paranoid person. Depending on the patinet's ego strength and degree of stress, it may be a psychotic, borderline, or neurotic level of projection. In a frankly psychotic person, upsetting parts of self are projected and fully believed to be "out there," no matter how crazy the projections may seem to others. The paranoid schizophrenic who believes that homosexual Bulgarian agents have poisoned his water is projecting his aggression, his wish for same-sex closeness, his ethnocentrism, and his fantasies of power. He does not find ways of making his beliefs fit with conventional notions of reality; he may be quite convinced that he is the only one in the world who sees the threat. Because reality testing is by definition not lost in people at a borderline level of personality organization, paranoid patients in the borderline range project in such a way that those on whom disowned attitudes are projected are subtly provoked to feel those attitudes. This is projective identification: The person tries to get rid of certain feelings, yet retains empathy with them and needs to reassure the self that they are realistic. The borderline paranoid person works to make his or her projections "fit" the projective target. Thus the woman who disowns her hatred and envy announces to her therapist in an antagonistic manner that she can tell that the therapist is jealous of her accomplishments; interpretations given in a sympathetic spirit are reinterpreted by the client as evidence of envy-driven wishes to undermine and control, and soon the therapist, worn down by being steadily misunderstood, is hating the patient and envying her freedom to vent her spleen. In paranoid people at the neurotic level, internal issues are projected in a potentially ego-alien way. That is, the patient projects yet has some observing part of the self that eventually will be capable, in the context of a reliable relationship, of acknowledging the externalized contents of the mind as projection.

The need of the paranoid person to handle upsetting feelings projectively entails the use of an unusual degree of denial and its close relative, reaction formation. All human beings project; indeed, the universal disposition toward projection is the basis for transference, the process that makes analytic therapy possible. But paranoid people do it in the context of such a great need to disavow upsetting attitudes that it feels like a whole different process from projective operations in which denial is not so integral.

The main polarity in the self-representations of paranoid people is an impotent, humiliated, and despised image of self versus an omnipotent, vindicated, triumphant one. A tension between two images suffuses their subjective world. Cruelly, neither position affords any solace: A terror of abuse and contempt goes with the weak side of the polarity, while the strong side brings with it the inevitable side effect of psychological power, a crushing guilt. The weak side of this polarity is the degree of fear with which paranoid people chronically live. They never feel fully safe and spend an inordinate amount of their emotional energy scanning the environment for dangers. The grandiose side is evident in their self-referential stance: Everything that happens has something to do with them personally. The megalomania of paranoid people, whether unconscious or overt, burderns them with unbearable guilt. If I am omnipotent, then all kinds of terrible things are my fault. The intimate connection between guilt and paranoia can be intuitively comprehended by any of us who have felt culpable and then worried about being exposed and punished.

A complex and pervasive issue for many paranoid people is the combination of sexual identity confusion, longings for same-sex closeness, and associated preoccupations with homosexuality. A connection between paranoia and homosexual preoccupations has been frequently noted by clinicians and has been confirmed by some empirical studies. Paranoid people, even the minority of them who have acted on homoerotic feelings, may regard the idea of same-sex attraction as upsetting to a degree that is scarcely imaginable to the non-paranoid. As the brief triumph of Nazism demonstrates, when paranoid trends are shared by a whole culture or subculture, the most horrific possibilities arise. The paranoid preoccupation with homosexuality has sometimes been explained as reflecting "unconscious homosexual impulses." This locution is misleading, in that it is not usually genital urges that stimulate homophobia; it is loneliness and the wish for a soulmate. Because as children we were comfortable with peers of the same sex before we became comfortable with opposite-sex peers, and because people of the same sex are more like us than people of the opposite sex, when we are withdrawn from everyone, we are attracted to someone of the same sex. Unfortunately, the patient becomes aware of this attraction, misinterprets it as homosexuality, and this sets off the defenses. In other words, at the core of the self-experience of paranoid poeple is a profound emotional isolation and need for a "consensual validation" from a "chum."

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: surepiro on January 08, 2012, 10:36:22 PM

[...] Like the kills of most successful snipers and fighter pilots, the vast majority of the killing done by these men were what some would call simple ambushes, and back shootings. No provocation, anger, or emotion empowered these killings.

[...]


But of course - these are the kinds of nihilistic killers - there is a movie "Mr. Brooks" which depicts a guy who killed people for the hell of it..


Examining his modus operandi, from the fastidious preparation and cleaning up of the crime scene before departing, it looks like Brooks was obsessed with not getting caught (he responds to Smith's inquiry as to whether the person they would agree on killing could be someone who he knew, by saying, that you never kill someone you know, that's the surest way to get caught) - and yet, as Smith lies dying, Brooks reveals that he used many different MOs before becoming the meticulous Thumbprint Killer.
Title: Re: Self-Fulfilling Prophecies
Post by: Figaro on January 09, 2012, 06:16:12 PM

[...] People have no rights and he, the psychopath, has no obligations that derive from the "social contract." The psychopath holds himself to be above conventional morality and the law. The psychopath cannot delay gratification. He wants everything and wants it now. His whims, urges, catering to his needs, and the satisfaction of his drives take precedence over the needs, preferences, and emotions of even his nearest and dearest.

Consequently, psychopaths feel no remorse when they hurt or defraud others. They don't possess even the most rudimentary conscience. They rationalize their (often criminal) behavior and intellectualize it. Psychopaths fall prey to their own primitive defense mechanisms (such as narcissism, splitting, and projection). [...] The psychopath projects his own vulnerabilities, weaknesses, and shortcomings unto others and force them to behave the way he expects them to (this defense mechanism is known as "projective identification") [...]


As to the mechanism you mention - I have read about a similar concept in social psychology - that of self-fulfilling prophecy, a process in which we find confirmation and proof for our stereotypes by creating stereotypical behavior in out-group members through our treatment of them. Word, Zanna & Cooper in 1974 conducted a set of experiments that shows such. In the first study, they asked white students to interview job applicants who were either white or black. The students tended to display discomfort when interviewing the blacks; for instance, they sat further away, stammered, and ended the interview earlier. In a second study, the researchers varied the behavior of the student interviewers so that the latter acted towards a job applicant either the way that the interviewers had acted towards whites or the way they had acted towards blacks in the first study. They found that those applicants who had been interviewed in the way that blacks had been interviewed were judged to be more nervous and less effective than the others.


Great post, Violet Bear!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: L Liberti on January 10, 2012, 11:23:43 PM

[...] Like the kills of most successful snipers and fighter pilots, the vast majority of the killing done by these men were what some would call simple ambushes, and back shootings. No provocation, anger, or emotion empowered these killings.

[...]


But of course - these are the kinds of nihilistic killers - there is a movie "Mr. Brooks" which depicts a guy who killed people for the hell of it..


Examining his modus operandi, from the fastidious preparation and cleaning up of the crime scene before departing, it looks like Brooks was obsessed with not getting caught (he responds to Smith's inquiry as to whether the person they would agree on killing could be someone who he knew, by saying, that you never kill someone you know, that's the surest way to get caught) - and yet, as Smith lies dying, Brooks reveals that he used many different MOs before becoming the meticulous Thumbprint Killer.


Serial offenders modify and perfect their MO as they become more adept at what they do. The improvement or slight adjustment to an offender's MO is something for investigators to bear in mind in analyzing a criminal pattern over time and formulating a behavioral profile. This is especially true in the first stages of profiling when the investigator begins his or her profile from the paradigm of the Organized/Disorganized continuum.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: 2 young 2 be in debt on January 15, 2012, 01:07:24 AM

[...] People have no rights and he, the psychopath, has no obligations that derive from the "social contract." The psychopath holds himself to be above conventional morality and the law. The psychopath cannot delay gratification. He wants everything and wants it now. His whims, urges, catering to his needs, and the satisfaction of his drives take precedence over the needs, preferences, and emotions of even his nearest and dearest.

Consequently, psychopaths feel no remorse when they hurt or defraud others. They don't possess even the most rudimentary conscience. They rationalize their (often criminal) behavior and intellectualize it. Psychopaths fall prey to their own primitive defense mechanisms (such as narcissism, splitting, and projection). [...] The psychopath projects his own vulnerabilities, weaknesses, and shortcomings unto others and force them to behave the way he expects them to (this defense mechanism is known as "projective identification") [...]


As to the mechanism you mention - I have read about a similar concept in social psychology - that of self-fulfilling prophecy, a process in which we find confirmation and proof for our stereotypes by creating stereotypical behavior in out-group members through our treatment of them. Word, Zanna & Cooper in 1974 conducted a set of experiments that shows such. In the first study, they asked white students to interview job applicants who were either white or black. The students tended to display discomfort when interviewing the blacks; for instance, they sat further away, stammered, and ended the interview earlier. In a second study, the researchers varied the behavior of the student interviewers so that the latter acted towards a job applicant either the way that the interviewers had acted towards whites or the way they had acted towards blacks in the first study. They found that those applicants who had been interviewed in the way that blacks had been interviewed were judged to be more nervous and less effective than the others.


Great post, Violet Bear!


My dear Figaro - I'm sorry but Violet Bear's post can not be that "great," for the fact that it refers to an experimental study of dubious value - I was reading the other day Leon Festinger's experimental study on cognitive dissonance and I could not help but be skeptical of his method and assumptions. Here it is for y'all to draw your own conclusions, in case mines appear not persuasive enough to ya :)

In Festinger's classic 1959 experiment, students were asked to spend an hour on boring and tedious tasks (e.g., turning pegs a quarter turn over and over again). The tasks were designed to generate a strong, negative attitude. Once the subjects had done this, the experimenters asked some of them to do a simple favor. They were asked to talk to another subject (actually an actor/confederate) trying to persuade them that the tasks were interesting and engaging. Some participants were paid $20 (inflation adjusted to 2010, equating to $150) for this favor, while another group was paid $1 ($7.50 in 2010 dollars) - the control group was not asked to perform the favor at all.

After someone has performed dissonant behavior, they may find external consonant elements. Par exemple, a snake oil salesman may find a justification for promoting falsehoods (let's say, a large personal gain) - but may otherwise need to change his views about the falsehoods themselves.

(http://s18.postimage.org/s27wd5nvr/788px_Cognitive_Dissonance_Diagram.jpg)

When asked to rate the boring tasks at the conclusion of the study (not in the presence of the other "subject"), those in the $1 group rated them more positively than those in the $20 and control groups.

This was explained by Festinger as evidence for Cognitive Dissonance. The researchers theorized that people experienced dissonance between the conflicting cognitions, "I told someone that the task was interesting", and "I actually found it boring." When paid only $1, students were forced to internalize the attitude they were induced to express, because they had no other justification. Those in the $20 condition, however, had an obvious external justification for their behavior, experienced less dissonance, thus did not force themselves to internalize.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Will you walk me 2 my car on January 20, 2012, 09:30:12 PM

My dear Figaro - I'm sorry but Violet Bear's post can not be that "great," for the fact that it refers to an experimental study of dubious value - I was reading the other day Leon Festinger's experimental study on cognitive dissonance and I could not help but be skeptical of his method and assumptions. Here it is for y'all to draw your own conclusions, in case mines appear not persuasive enough to ya :)

In Festinger's classic 1959 experiment, students were asked to spend an hour on boring and tedious tasks (e.g., turning pegs a quarter turn over and over again). The tasks were designed to generate a strong, negative attitude. Once the subjects had done this, the experimenters asked some of them to do a simple favor. They were asked to talk to another subject (actually an actor/confederate) trying to persuade them that the tasks were interesting and engaging. Some participants were paid $20 (inflation adjusted to 2010, equating to $150) for this favor, while another group was paid $1 ($7.50 in 2010 dollars) - the control group was not asked to perform the favor at all.

After someone has performed dissonant behavior, they may find external consonant elements. Par exemple, a snake oil salesman may find a justification for promoting falsehoods (let's say, a large personal gain) - but may otherwise need to change his views about the falsehoods themselves.

(http://s18.postimage.org/s27wd5nvr/788px_Cognitive_Dissonance_Diagram.jpg)

When asked to rate the boring tasks at the conclusion of the study (not in the presence of the other "subject"), those in the $1 group rated them more positively than those in the $20 and control groups.

This was explained by Festinger as evidence for Cognitive Dissonance. The researchers theorized that people experienced dissonance between the conflicting cognitions, "I told someone that the task was interesting", and "I actually found it boring." When paid only $1, students were forced to internalize the attitude they were induced to express, because they had no other justification. Those in the $20 condition, however, had an obvious external justification for their behavior, experienced less dissonance, thus did not force themselves to internalize.


2 young 2, could you please expand a bit on the CD theory?
Title: Re: Dissonance & Jim Jones Case
Post by: Just Say No! on January 21, 2012, 09:29:48 PM
Will you walk, the CD Theory is all too complex to fully explain it here - I'd focus instead on the practical applications of the Dissonance Theory. That's because one of the reasons it has inspired much research is its ability to explain phenomena not readily explainable by common sense. For instance, dissonance theory has been used as a way to understand events that totally confound our imagination - like the enormous power certain cult leaders like Jim Jones, David Koresh, and Marshall Herff Applewhite have had over the hearts and minds of their followers.

Take for instance Jim Jones. It goes without saying that the massacre at Jonestown was tragic in the extreme. It is beyond comprehension that a single person could make hundreds of people kill themselves and their own children.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/02-jones-jim_ji.jpg)
"Jim" Jones was the founder and leader of the "Peoples Temple," best known for the Nov 18, 1978 mass suicide of 909 Temple members in Jonestown, Guyana, along with the killings of 5 other people at a nearby airstrip. Over 200 children were murdered at Jonestown, almost all of whom were forcefully made to ingest cyanide by the elite Temple members. Jones was born in Indiana and started the Temple in that state in the 1950s. Jones and the Temple later moved to California, and both gained notoriety with the move of the Temple's headquarters to San Francisco in the mid-1970s. The incident in Guyana ranks among the largest mass suicides in history, and was the single greatest loss of American civilian life in a non-natural disaster until the events of Sep 11, 2001.

Now you may have heard about the all-too-familiar technique of the foot-in-the-door. Escalation is perpetuating. Once a small commitment is made, it sets the stage for ever-increasing commitments. The behavior needs to be justified, so attitudes are changed; this change in attitudes influences future decisions and behavior. Suppose you would like to enlist someone's aid in a massive undertaking, but you know the job you have in mind for the person is so difficult, and will require so much time and effort, that the person will surely decline. What do you do? You may get the person involved in much smaller aspects of the job, ones so easy that s/he wouldn't dream of turning down. Such serves to commit the individual to the "cause." Once people are thus committed, the likelihood of their complying with the larger request increases.

Jim Jones extracted great trust from his followers one step at a time. There was a chain of ever-increasing commitments on the part of his followers. Once a small commitment is made, the stage is set for ever-increasing commitments. It's easy to understand how a charismatic leader like Jones might extract money from his church's members. Once they have committed themselves to donating a small amount in response to his message of peace and universal brotherhood, he's able to request and receive a great deal more. Next, he induces people to sell their homes and turn over the money to the church. Soon, at his request, several of his followers pull up stakes, leaving their families and friends, to start life anew in the strange and difficult environment of Guyana. There, not only do they work hard (thus increasing their commitment), but they also are cut off from potential dissenting opinion, inasmuch as they are surrounded by true believers.

Jones takes sexual liberties with several married women among his followers, who acquiesce, but reluctantly; Jones claims to be the father of their children. He had sexual relations with his men followers as well, and made them believe they were all homosexuals, while he was the only heterosexual. Finally, as a prelude to the climactic event, Jones induces his followers to perform a series of mock ritual suicides as a test of their loyalty and obedience. Thus, in a step-by-step fashion, the commitment to Jones increases. Each step in itself is not a huge, ludicrous leap from the one preceding it.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: breach of contract on January 27, 2012, 06:00:48 PM

[...]

A complex and pervasive issue for many paranoid people is the combination of sexual identity confusion, longings for same-sex closeness, and associated preoccupations with homosexuality. A connection between paranoia and homosexual preoccupations has been frequently noted by clinicians and has been confirmed by some empirical studies. Paranoid people, even the minority of them who have acted on homoerotic feelings, may regard the idea of same-sex attraction as upsetting to a degree that is scarcely imaginable to the non-paranoid. As the brief triumph of Nazism demonstrates, when paranoid trends are shared by a whole culture or subculture, the most horrific possibilities arise. The paranoid preoccupation with homosexuality has sometimes been explained as reflecting "unconscious homosexual impulses." This locution is misleading, in that it is not usually genital urges that stimulate homophobia; it is loneliness and the wish for a soulmate. Because as children we were comfortable with peers of the same sex before we became comfortable with opposite-sex peers, and because people of the same sex are more like us than people of the opposite sex, when we are withdrawn from everyone, we are attracted to someone of the same sex. Unfortunately, the patient becomes aware of this attraction, misinterprets it as homosexuality, and this sets off the defenses. In other words, at the core of the self-experience of paranoid people is a profound emotional isolation and need for a "consensual validation" from a "chum."


So is this this kind of homosexual yearning, more of a "state of mind," rather than something that gets (sometimes) physically expressed (in a more or less normal homosexual act) - because, truth-be-told, I don't exactly see gay people today, that have sex with hundreds, or even thousands, of other men, considering same-sex attraction as "upsetting," as you put it. I am aware that you and I are talking about two different kinds of gay people here, but I am sort of confused as to how exactly does each one feel about how they are and what they do. Could someone please provide some insight?

Thanks, in advance, breach of contract.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: naykid on January 28, 2012, 05:56:05 PM

[...]

A complex and pervasive issue for many paranoid people is the combination of sexual identity confusion, longings for same-sex closeness, and associated preoccupations with homosexuality. A connection between paranoia and homosexual preoccupations has been frequently noted by clinicians and has been confirmed by some empirical studies.

Paranoid people, even the minority of them who have acted on homoerotic feelings, may regard the idea of same-sex attraction as upsetting to a degree that is scarcely imaginable to the non-paranoid.

As the brief triumph of Nazism demonstrates, when paranoid trends are shared by a whole culture or subculture, the most horrific possibilities arise.

The paranoid preoccupation with homosexuality has sometimes been explained as reflecting "unconscious homosexual impulses." This locution is misleading, in that it is not usually genital urges that stimulate homophobia; it is loneliness and the wish for a soulmate. Because as children we were comfortable with peers of the same sex before we became comfortable with opposite-sex peers, and because people of the same sex are more like us than people of the opposite sex, when we are withdrawn from everyone, we are attracted to someone of the same sex.

Unfortunately, the patient becomes aware of this attraction, misinterprets it as homosexuality, and this sets off the defenses. In other words, at the core of the self-experience of paranoid people is a profound emotional isolation and need for a "consensual validation" from a "chum."


So is this this kind of homosexual yearning, more of a "state of mind," rather than something that gets (sometimes) physically expressed (in a more or less normal homosexual act) - because, truth-be-told, I don't exactly see gay people today, that have sex with hundreds, or even thousands, of other men, considering same-sex attraction as "upsetting," as you put it. I am aware that you and I are talking about two different kinds of gay people here, but I am sort of confused as to how exactly does each one feel about who they are and what they do. Could someone please provide some insight?

Thanks, in advance, breach of contract.


Take Hitler: They say there is insufficient evidence that Hitler was an overt homosexual. But it seemed clear he had latent homosexual tendencies, and that he worried a lot about them. He was terribly concerned, for example, lest he give the impression of showing feminine traits - which, indeed, he did. A colleague of the himself-homosexual English diplomat and historian Sir Harold Nicolson, spoke of Hitler as being "the most profoundly feminine man that he had ever met, and that there were moments when he became almost effeminate."

Hitler also revealed fears of homosexuality by protesting so much that he had no feminine characteristics whatsoever. He was totally masculine - tough, hard, cold, ruthless, brutal. His tendency to think in terms of disjunctive stereotypes about men and women (strong, iron-willed, effective males vs. weak, emotional, incompetent female) is in itself revealing. Such thinking demonstrates a strong conflict and confusion between masculine and feminine natures. To him, sexual differences appeared as exaggerated and mutually exclusive opposites, as roles to be played, rather as natural attributes of human personality. In Hitler's case, as in Himmler's, the fantasized tough male role developed into sadism, murder and destruction.

The question of Hitler's latent homosexuality can also be approached indirectly. It can be stated with some confidence that Hitler must have had latent homosexual tendencies because he showed clear indications of paranoia. This does not mean that all homosexuals are paranoid, but it does mean that all paranoids have fears of homosexuality. The direct connection between homosexuality and paranoia was first noticed by Freud, who concluded that paranoia "invariably arises from an attempt to subdue an unduly powerful homosexual wish."

There is a terrifically strong need to deny homosexuality; the very thought of sexual contact with another man is "completely intolerable." Moreover, the need felt by a paranoid for approval is especially acute; his megalomania is in itself an expression of his need for proof that he is important. There is a high incidence of constipation in paranoid individuals. All paranoids have strong anal components, problems with order and cleanliness, and obsessions with purity and vice, as well as impurity and infections of others. Anal sadistic fantasies are directed towards the father, because he is seen as the rival for the mother's love; the intensity of the drive to be loved is supported mainly "by the intense need to neutralize and erotisize a tremendous hate." When the unconscious hate is so great, the attempt to erotisize it fails, and the individual turns to sadism.

While homosexual feeling and paranoid delusions may be in bitter conflict, both are, in a sense, dependent on each other and are defenses against one another. Thus, it seems quite possible that Hitler developed paranoid delusions, in part, to fight his homosexual feelings. As long as he persecuted and attacked homosexuals, he felt he was successfully combating his own inadmissible inclinations toward homosexuality.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: naykid on January 28, 2012, 06:42:37 PM
With one part of the equation (paranoia) in mind, let us further examine the other part (homosexuality). People have looked into the actual social milieu Hitler was part of to deduce that he, too, practiced homosexuality. For instance,


Hitler quit school at age 16 and in 1909 moved to Vienna, where he twice took and failed the Art Academy's entrance examination. Shortly after his move, August Kubizek, a young man from his hometown, joined him and they lived together for 4 months. Intensely jealous, Hitler wrote Kubizek, "I cannot endure it when you consort and converse with other young people." For the next several years, Hitler drifted aimlessly. Despite immense Nazi efforts to erase as much of his past as possible (by destroying his massive police records, for example) it is known that he spent 5 months at a men's hostel known as "a hub of homosexual activity." In May 1913, he moved with another young man to Munich (said to be "a regular El Dorado for homosexuals") and, in September 1914, joined the Bavarian army. He spent the war years as a behind-the-lines messenger, enjoying a long and active sexual relationship with another runner, Ernst Schmidt. At war's end, Hitler returned to Munich and more homosexual activities. He met at that time Capt. Ernst Roehm, a well-connected army officer who soon offered him his first job — as a political spy for the army within a newly organized workers' party.

Hitler's rise largely was due to the two brilliant homosexuals who mentored and tutored him: Roehm, a notorious pederast and a contemporary, and Dietrich Eckart, 21 years his senior. Roehm, a career staff officer during the war, had access to both secret army funds and to military and right-wing groups such as the ultranationalist, anti-Semitic and homoerotic Freikorps — the fiercely anticommunist terrorist squads that sprang up, especially in eastern Germany, in response to the political chaos of the early Weimar Republic. Eckart was a fiercely anti-Semitic journalist and playwright who taught Hitler political tactics and introduced him to Munich and Berlin society, as well as to other wealthy people throughout the country.

Most of the top ranking SS from the very beginning were also homosexual. Ernst Roehm, whom Hitler was a protégé, created the Nazi party on the idea of being proud so called ultra-masculine, male supremacist pedophiles. When you cast a net with that kind of bait what kind of fish do you think you are going to catch? In fact, they actually thought because of their homosexuality they were ultra-masculine because they didn't need women for anything, including sex and companionship. The idea was that because they had no personal need for women, homosexual men were superior to even heterosexual men. They believed that homosexual men were the foundation of all nation-states and represented the elite strata of human society. Naturally, to support their argument they drew much of their pride from the accomplishments of the Greeks, quite possibly the gayest civilization ever to walk to earth.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: that guest on January 30, 2012, 06:21:13 PM

[...]

The theory or the "model" at the base of author's reflections is Bion's model "container-contained", also called his "theory of thinking". [...] It is at one and the same time: the model of conception (penis-in-vagina), gestation (embryo-in-uterus), alimentation (nipple-in-mouth) and elimination (faeces-in-colon). This fundamental pattern -- 'one thing inside another', as Bion simply calls it -- in its many variations and permutations, forms the model for all human somatopsychological experience from the very beginning of life.

Bion posits a "place" or an "object", which he calls the "container", whose purpose is to take up a "something" which needs to be contained. Through this process both container and that-which-is-to-be-contained are transformed, and something new, a "third" element comes into being. [...] Bion's starting point is what he refers to as the "proto-mental", the somato-psychic level of experiences, consisting of emotional entities "in the raw", which to he gives the name "beta elements". According to Bion, these bits of raw sense data are, as it were, "looking for", or "in search of" a place where they can grow and be transformed into thoughts, dreams ideas, myths, etc. For in Bion's theory of thinking, all thoughts exist a priori to their being actually thought; that is to say, they are simply 'there' in some potential space/time, independent of there being a thinker to think them. Bion's image of thoughts simply being "there" without having found a thinker to think them yet, is reminiscent of Luigi Pirandello's drama "Six Characters in Search of an Author." They, too, these six characters "exist" ostensibly a priori to an author's mind having created them, and their search can be thought of as being analogous to the "searching" of thoughts for a mind, for a thinker to think them.

When these "thoughts without a thinker" find such a "nesting place" in the mind of a "host" (mother, therapist, consultant, supervisor, leader etc.) so to speak, they can then be transformed into so-called "alpha elements" through the state of mind which Bion has named "reverie", and the process which he has called "alpha function." He emphasizes, however, that he neither knows what alpha-function is or how it functions, he just knows that it does! [...] It all depends, he says, on the presence of "negative capability", i.e. the capability to take in without judging and without explanation, the ability just to "be with one's experience", to tolerate uncertainty, mystery and doubt without any "irritable grasping for facts and reason."

When the containing object (the psyche of the container) takes up the contained (i.e. the projected, the not-understood, the painful, needy, as yet uncontained, unthinkable beta elements) from the subject, it must be capable of carrying out this metabolic, disentangling process within itself, in order to be able to feed it back to the subject in small, digestible doses, so that it can now be metabolised by the subject and used for mental growth, rather than being simply expelled, "spat out" again as mentally indigestible.

Negative capability, which enables the object to "dream" (reverie) upon, to ponder and reflect upon these projected parts, requires a state of mind which Bion calls "patience" and which gradually changes into a state of mind which he calls "certainty" when the "to-be-contained" has been understood, detoxicated and re-presented to the subject. [...] This, then, is the process which, according to Bion, has to take place in every mother, in every therapist, consultant or supervisor, in every leader if he  has the intention of being helpful to his/her "baby" (patient, client, supervisee, client system, team, staff, organisation, company, nation or people), and to the extent to which the necessity of performing a containing function for those who are to follow his or her lead is both recognised and possible.


This appears to be quite interesting to me - could someone provide a link where I can read the whole thing - I mean, Bion's theory of the Container/Contained?
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: blinker on on January 31, 2012, 05:01:19 PM

[...]

The theory or the "model" at the base of author's reflections is Bion's model "container-contained", also called his "theory of thinking". [...] It is at one and the same time: the model of conception (penis-in-vagina), gestation (embryo-in-uterus), alimentation (nipple-in-mouth) and elimination (faeces-in-colon). This fundamental pattern -- 'one thing inside another', as Bion simply calls it -- in its many variations and permutations, forms the model for all human somatopsychological experience from the very beginning of life.

Bion posits a "place" or an "object", which he calls the "container", whose purpose is to take up a "something" which needs to be contained. Through this process both container and that-which-is-to-be-contained are transformed, and something new, a "third" element comes into being. [...] Bion's starting point is what he refers to as the "proto-mental", the somato-psychic level of experiences, consisting of emotional entities "in the raw", which to he gives the name "beta elements". According to Bion, these bits of raw sense data are, as it were, "looking for", or "in search of" a place where they can grow and be transformed into thoughts, dreams ideas, myths, etc. For in Bion's theory of thinking, all thoughts exist a priori to their being actually thought; that is to say, they are simply 'there' in some potential space/time, independent of there being a thinker to think them. Bion's image of thoughts simply being "there" without having found a thinker to think them yet, is reminiscent of Luigi Pirandello's drama "Six Characters in Search of an Author." They, too, these six characters "exist" ostensibly a priori to an author's mind having created them, and their search can be thought of as being analogous to the "searching" of thoughts for a mind, for a thinker to think them.

When these "thoughts without a thinker" find such a "nesting place" in the mind of a "host" (mother, therapist, consultant, supervisor, leader etc.) so to speak, they can then be transformed into so-called "alpha elements" through the state of mind which Bion has named "reverie", and the process which he has called "alpha function." He emphasizes, however, that he neither knows what alpha-function is or how it functions, he just knows that it does! [...] It all depends, he says, on the presence of "negative capability", i.e. the capability to take in without judging and without explanation, the ability just to "be with one's experience", to tolerate uncertainty, mystery and doubt without any "irritable grasping for facts and reason."

When the containing object (the psyche of the container) takes up the contained (i.e. the projected, the not-understood, the painful, needy, as yet uncontained, unthinkable beta elements) from the subject, it must be capable of carrying out this metabolic, disentangling process within itself, in order to be able to feed it back to the subject in small, digestible doses, so that it can now be metabolised by the subject and used for mental growth, rather than being simply expelled, "spat out" again as mentally indigestible.

Negative capability, which enables the object to "dream" (reverie) upon, to ponder and reflect upon these projected parts, requires a state of mind which Bion calls "patience" and which gradually changes into a state of mind which he calls "certainty" when the "to-be-contained" has been understood, detoxicated and re-presented to the subject. [...] This, then, is the process which, according to Bion, has to take place in every mother, in every therapist, consultant or supervisor, in every leader if he  has the intention of being helpful to his/her "baby" (patient, client, supervisee, client system, team, staff, organisation, company, nation or people), and to the extent to which the necessity of performing a containing function for those who are to follow his or her lead is both recognised and possible.


This appears to be quite interesting to me - could someone provide a link where I can read the whole thing - I mean, Bion's theory of the Container/Contained?


that guest - are you trying to be a smart a s s here, pulling our legs, or what?!

This guy is an a s s - and when I say an a s s, I mean a TOTAL A S S - and you want a link where to read all his crap?! Container-Contained, d i c k-in-a-p u s s y and * & ^ % like that!

But it's not his fault, it's the fault of all the a s s e s that read and print him!

I mean, we've read a lot of crazy stuff before, Freud too used to be a moron, but not THIS moronic! Or better to say, because we've been reading him for such a long time, we've kinda gotten used to his * & ^ % a little by little!

Anyways, looks like that's how this thing works, they see people kinda accept one guy's * & ^ %, and they go for their own * & ^ %, hoping they won't look to people as idiotic as they truly are!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: two feasts on February 02, 2012, 01:59:45 PM

[...]

A complex and pervasive issue for many paranoid people is the combination of sexual identity confusion, longings for same-sex closeness, and associated preoccupations with homosexuality. A connection between paranoia and homosexual preoccupations has been frequently noted by clinicians and has been confirmed by some empirical studies. Paranoid people, even the minority of them who have acted on homoerotic feelings, may regard the idea of same-sex attraction as upsetting to a degree that is scarcely imaginable to the non-paranoid. As the brief triumph of Nazism demonstrates, when paranoid trends are shared by a whole culture or subculture, the most horrific possibilities arise. The paranoid preoccupation with homosexuality has sometimes been explained as reflecting "unconscious homosexual impulses." This locution is misleading, in that it is not usually genital urges that stimulate homophobia; it is loneliness and the wish for a soulmate. Because as children we were comfortable with peers of the same sex before we became comfortable with opposite-sex peers, and because people of the same sex are more like us than people of the opposite sex, when we are withdrawn from everyone, we are attracted to someone of the same sex. Unfortunately, the patient becomes aware of this attraction, misinterprets it as homosexuality, and this sets off the defenses. In other words, at the core of the self-experience of paranoid people is a profound emotional isolation and need for a "consensual validation" from a "chum."


So is this this kind of homosexual yearning, more of a "state of mind," rather than something that gets (sometimes) physically expressed (in a more or less normal homosexual act) - because, truth-be-told, I don't exactly see gay people today, that have sex with hundreds, or even thousands, of other men, considering same-sex attraction as "upsetting," as you put it. I am aware that you and I are talking about two different kinds of gay people here, but I am sort of confused as to how exactly does each one feel about how they are and what they do. Could someone please provide some insight?

Thanks, in advance, breach of contract.


You are welcome, breach - I would like to elucidate (hopefully) with something - just because a gay guy may go with say, close to 100 other men, it does not mean he does not find the contacts "upsetting."

Alternatively, this guy may find the memories of these contacts "upsetting," later on, when confronted/outed/whatever by other people, but find them quite fulfilling when actually having them (the social factor).

Sorry for not being more helpful, if I wasn't :)
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: we fly for your smile on February 04, 2012, 11:45:32 AM
With one part of the equation (paranoia) in mind, let us further examine the other part (homosexuality). People have looked into the actual social milieu Hitler was part of to deduce that he, too, practiced homosexuality. For instance,

  • Hitler's Youth leader, Baldur von Schirach was bisexual and a pedophile;
  • Hitler's private attorney, Reich Legal Director, was homosexual;
  • Minister of Justice, an adamant fag basher Hans Frank was a homosexual (typical);
  • Hitler's adjutant Wilhelm Bruckner was bisexual;
  • Walter Funk, Reich Minister of Economics and Hitler's personal financial advisor has frequently been called a "notorious" homosexual;
  • Hitler's second in command Hermann Goering liked to dress up in drag;
  • Rudolph Hess, the handsome Hess, nicknamed "Miss Emma" was gay;
  • All of his personal bodyguards were gay;
  • Even his chauffeur was gay.

Hitler quit school at age 16 and in 1909 moved to Vienna, where he twice took and failed the Art Academy's entrance examination. Shortly after his move, August Kubizek, a young man from his hometown, joined him and they lived together for 4 months. Intensely jealous, Hitler wrote Kubizek, "I cannot endure it when you consort and converse with other young people." For the next several years, Hitler drifted aimlessly. Despite immense Nazi efforts to erase as much of his past as possible (by destroying his massive police records, for example) it is known that he spent 5 months at a men's hostel known as "a hub of homosexual activity." In May 1913, he moved with another young man to Munich (said to be "a regular El Dorado for homosexuals") and, in September 1914, joined the Bavarian army. He spent the war years as a behind-the-lines messenger, enjoying a long and active sexual relationship with another runner, Ernst Schmidt. At war's end, Hitler returned to Munich and more homosexual activities. He met at that time Capt. Ernst Roehm, a well-connected army officer who soon offered him his first job — as a political spy for the army within a newly organized workers' party.

Hitler's rise largely was due to the two brilliant homosexuals who mentored and tutored him: Roehm, a notorious pederast and a contemporary, and Dietrich Eckart, 21 years his senior. Roehm, a career staff officer during the war, had access to both secret army funds and to military and right-wing groups such as the ultranationalist, anti-Semitic and homoerotic Freikorps — the fiercely anticommunist terrorist squads that sprang up, especially in eastern Germany, in response to the political chaos of the early Weimar Republic. Eckart was a fiercely anti-Semitic journalist and playwright who taught Hitler political tactics and introduced him to Munich and Berlin society, as well as to other wealthy people throughout the country.

Most of the top ranking SS from the very beginning were also homosexual. Ernst Roehm, whom Hitler was a protégé, created the Nazi party on the idea of being proud so called ultra-masculine, male supremacist pedophiles. When you cast a net with that kind of bait what kind of fish do you think you are going to catch? In fact, they actually thought because of their homosexuality they were ultra-masculine because they didn't need women for anything, including sex and companionship. The idea was that because they had no personal need for women, homosexual men were superior to even heterosexual men. They believed that homosexual men were the foundation of all nation-states and represented the elite strata of human society. Naturally, to support their argument they drew much of their pride from the accomplishments of the Greeks, quite possibly the gayest civilization ever to walk to earth.

From what I gather here, it looks like Nazis were a lil' bit into this homosexual thing (homoerotic thing, to put it a bit more mildly - or should I say a bit more harshly? :) And that Hitler, later on, did what he did with homosexuals to 'purge,' come kinda clean in the eyes of P.O. (public opinion) ...

At a hindsight, applying a "nuts-4-nuts" kind of logic, it only makes sense that they would affectionate with other men - take a look here what Freud says about groups dynamics, homoerotic bonding and that very first murder - looks like the more authoritarian a regime, the more 'cohesive' and homoerotic the ruling group has to be ..

Quote

For one Freud has pointed to the sexual, and indeed the homoerotic, origins of political authority. [...] Freud locates the origins of the sons' collective organization, their ability to challenge the father's sexual monopoly, in "the homosexual feelings and activities which probably manifested themselves during the time of their banishment." The father's imposition of heterosexual austerities on his sons pushes them into mutual erotic identification, "into group psychology."

After killing the primal father, the sons agree that all the clan's women would be denied them. In "Totem and Taboo" Freud made homoerotics into a substitution for heteroerotics, one standing at the origin of the first social contract, the sons' renunciation of the women of the clan as sensuous objects, and their conversion into sexual property to be exhanged exogamously. If exogamous heterosexuality is an original consequence of social organization, endogamous homosexuality is its original source. He never wavered on this foundational basis of modern social organization.

Indeed in "Group Psychology and the Analysis of Ego" Freud makes heterosexual desire into an enemy of social organization, whereas "desexualized, sublimated homosexual love for other, which springs from work in common" is a "civilizing factor." There is no room for woman as a sexual object, he writes, in the great artificial groups of society. The implication is, of course, that there is a place for men as sexual objects. "It seems certain," he writes, "that homosexual love is far more compatible with group ties, even when it takes the shape of uninhibited sexual impulsion..." If in his mythico-history he makes the homoerotics of the rother clan the mediation between the primal horde and exogamous patriarchy,

[...] The male self is both formed and sexed as a resolution of an inhabitation of the bodily form of paternal authority, an outside which is in us, but not of us, but the condition for our being. This homoerotic loss initiates the ego as a perceptual object, as a container for reflexively turned, unavowable erotic desire and sadistic rage at its loss and unhabitatibility. That desire is both refused and retained in a melancholic gender identification, an ungrievable loss. Men want to have the femininity they can never be and want to be the masculinity they can never have. The habitable space of gender is grounded in an uninhabitable space of sex.

Paternal identification solves not one, but two problems in this sexual economy. Group formation likewise operates through paternal identification, which, like his murder, is enabled through homoerotic solidarity among the sons. Immediately after explaining in "Group Psychology" that the introjected paternal object is a substitute for the libidinal object tie with the woman, Freud launches into the genesis of male homosexuality, the boy's failure to give up the mother as a cathected object, the "negative" Oedipal complex, the transformation of the male ego on the model of the female. Boy becomes girl mirroring the way in which he has the man, through the matrilineal totem, becoming woman. Group formation is a quintessentially masculine, yet involves men being womanly.

Freud makes homosocial energy the basis of solidarity in complex groups and locates the origin of the social in a renunciation of heterosexual desire. He derives the experience of consubstantiality of totem and man from a fleshy family, from the mother-child bond and the son's deferred identification with the father. [...] For what in Freud is a feminizing, violent subordination to masculine hierarchy [...]

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: applewasp on February 05, 2012, 11:54:04 AM

Take Hitler: They say there is insufficient evidence that Hitler was an overt homosexual. But it seemed clear he had latent homosexual tendencies, and that he worried a lot about them. He was terribly concerned, for example, lest he give the impression of showing feminine traits - which, indeed, he did. A colleague of the himself-homosexual English diplomat and historian Sir Harold Nicolson, spoke of Hitler as being "the most profoundly feminine man that he had ever met, and that there were moments when he became almost effeminate."

Hitler also revealed fears of homosexuality by protesting so much that he had no feminine characteristics whatsoever. He was totally masculine - tough, hard, cold, ruthless, brutal. His tendency to think in terms of disjunctive stereotypes about men and women (strong, iron-willed, effective males vs. weak, emotional, incompetent female) is in itself revealing. Such thinking demonstrates a strong conflict and confusion between masculine and feminine natures. To him, sexual differences appeared as exaggerated and mutually exclusive opposites, as roles to be played, rather as natural attributes of human personality. In Hitler's case, as in Himmler's, the fantasized tough male role developed into sadism, murder and destruction.

The question of Hitler's latent homosexuality can also be approached indirectly. It can be stated with some confidence that Hitler must have had latent homosexual tendencies because he showed clear indications of paranoia. This does not mean that all homosexuals are paranoid, but it does mean that all paranoids have fears of homosexuality. The direct connection between homosexuality and paranoia was first noticed by Freud, who concluded that paranoia "invariably arises from an attempt to subdue an unduly powerful homosexual wish."

There is a terrifically strong need to deny homosexuality; the very thought of sexual contact with another man is "completely intolerable." Moreover, the need felt by a paranoid for approval is especially acute; his megalomania is in itself an expression of his need for proof that he is important. There is a high incidence of constipation in paranoid individuals. All paranoids have strong anal components, problems with order and cleanliness, and obsessions with purity and vice, as well as impurity and infections of others. Anal sadistic fantasies are directed towards the father, because he is seen as the rival for the mother's love; the intensity of the drive to be loved is supported mainly "by the intense need to neutralize and erotisize a tremendous hate." When the unconscious hate is so great, the attempt to erotisize it fails, and the individual turns to sadism.

While homosexual feeling and paranoid delusions may be in bitter conflict, both are, in a sense, dependent on each other and are defenses against one another. Thus, it seems quite possible that Hitler developed paranoid delusions, in part, to fight his homosexual feelings. As long as he persecuted and attacked homosexuals, he felt he was successfully combating his own inadmissible inclinations toward homosexuality.


Does the latter mean that, Hitler called, for instance, Jews homosexuals (allegedly undermining the manliness and and fighting spirit of the German people) in part to fight his unacceptable homosexual feelings? Or, that he judged so many other people as being inferior, lacking that perceived German "manliness" and "fighting spirit," as it was the case with Communists, liberals, gypsies, homosexuals, victims of warfare, etc?!

Distancing now a bit from the homosexual part of the equation, to fully address the paranoia one, we would have to add that when concocting the Jews conspiracy he mixed antisemitism and stereotypes of the Jews as Communists, as subversives and all kinds of other things - as a means to an end. Jews became a scapegoat for Germany's economic problems - enough to remind people of that conspiracy of "Jewish bankers" (Remember Fräulein Kost's line from "Cabaret," when asking, "If all the Jews are bankers, then how can they be Communists, too?")

A distinctive feature of Hitler's antisemitism was that it was formulated as conspiracy theory. For many, especially in Bavaria, this went hand in hand with the 'stab-in-the-back' theory, that is, with the view that Germany had not been defeated on the battlefield but had been brought down by liberal, socialist and Communist subversives on the home front. In other words, it was claimed that "the Jews had caused Germany's defeat in World War 1." Potentially, this made antisemitism explosive in Germany.

As we try to understand Holocaust, we'd have to also explain a bit the Darwinian biology of the time. There was a growing sense that there were those in society who were 'biologically' inferior and that for a 'fit' world to survive and thrive, those who were 'unfit' should be done away with. Instead of letting nature take its course, there was a unspoken sense that humans could take matters into their own hands. So when Hitler took power he started rounding all these people up. He used the Jews, Poles, gays, gypsies, Russians and mentally challenged people as slave labor and then started to annihilate them in gas chambers. He classed the above mentioned people as sub-human and basically in his Nazi world there was no place for the "sub-human", only the 'Aryans'.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: applewasp on February 05, 2012, 12:18:20 PM
Here it a post dealing with the issue along similar lines,


White supremacists thus offer men the restoration of their masculinity -- Theirs is the militarized manhood of the heroic John Rambo, a manhood that celebrates their God-sanctioned right to band together in armed militias if anyone, or any government agency, tries to take it away from them. If the state and the economy emasculate them, and if the masculinity of the "others" is problematic, then only "real" white men can rescue America from a feminized, multicultural, androgynous melting pot.

For instance, many of Hitler's policies -- such as the killing of long-time colleague and avowed homosexual Ernst Rohm, or even the systematic persecution and execution of gay men in concentration camps -- were, in fact, prompted by a desire to conceal his own homosexuality. But what do such accusations actually explain? Do revelations about Hitler's possible gay propensities raise troubling connections between homosexuality and mass murder? They do address the consequences of homophobia, at least -- both official and informal homophobia -- on young men who are exploring their sexual identities. What's relevant is not the possible fact of Hitler's gayness, but the shame and fear that surround homosexuality in societies that refuse to acknowledge sexual diversity. What is interesting about Hitler is not their repressed sexual orientation but gender -- their masculinity, their sense of masculine entitlement, and their thwarted ambitions. They accepted cultural definitions of masculinity, and needed someone to blame when they felt that they failed to measure up. (After all, being called a mama's boy, and told to toughen up are demands for gender conformity, not matters of sexual desire.)

These males seek great power and status in society and understood that hating and punishing homosexuals was always perceived to be a reflection of the "highest morality." Therefore, one of the best "closet" situation available included their participation in the destruction of their own kind; it is now strongly suspected that Senator Joseph McCarthy who headed the American homosexual witch-hunts in the early 1950s was also homosexual. His prosecuting attorney, Roy Cohn, was definitely gay. At the time few people knew that the hunters of "dangerous", "evil," and "morally weak" homosexuals were themselves homosexual. If, however, anyone fitted negative homosexual stereotypes, it was these self-hating homo-hunters considered to be "morally righteous" because they were reflecting our society's traditional morality; this was the type of morality also used to make the desired destruction of all Native cultures appear to be righteous. We hated homosexuals and behaved accordingly, and Roy Cohn continued his abuses of homosexual people up to his death from AIDS in 1986. He had become very powerful, was very promiscuous, needed to have sex with a male at least once a day, and he could afford to have 4-5 young male prostitutes on his payroll so that his sexual needs would be met. He was strongly opposed to equal rights for gays, and was totally against the idea of having openly gay teachers in public schools.

Our homohatred also causes other problems such as creating countless males - "monsters" - who are in a psychological closet, have sex with males, and always deny they are in any way homosexual or bisexual. This is done to avoid the total destruction of their self-esteem intimately related to socially learned perceptions. Ultra-macho males in prisons accomplish this by having a belief system causing them to degrade other males to a subhuman level. In accordance to men's traditional view of women, the inferior sex slave status of the males they rape, use, and abuse is deemed to be "the female status." Once males have been magically turned into women, dominant males then consider their homo-sexual activities with these women (also equates to gay-identified males) to then be "normal" and "heterosexual."

There are, however, other ways that similar types of defenses against the homosexual self-label can be articulated. These males to be "homophobic, gay-bashing hoodlums who pick up or are picked up by a gay male, have sex with him, and they exorcize their own homosexual guilt by assaulting and maybe killing him. The "exorcist syndrome" which is a version of the "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" nature manifested by people like Cardinal Spellman and Roy Cohn. The phenomena is also similar to a "split personality" situation. One of the personalities is "the grand inquisitor," as McCarthy and Cohn had become in a spectacular way, and it needs to punish the homosexual part of their 'personality'. This internal war is also projected outward causing these socially created monsters to harm other gay males by ruining their careers or, as other males will do, punishing them may include physical assaults and even murder.

A fascinating aspect of the war waged against gays in our society is the observation that it is often being waged by repressed homosexuals who may not be homosexually active, or repressed closeted homosexuals who are having sex with males and hate themselves. The targets may be other closeted homosexuals, but the victims are more often visible "out of the closet" gay males. These wars, however, would not exist if our society would stop its highly effective teaching of anti-homosexual attitudes and homohatred which produces many "closets" and all the horrors being described. When we teach hatred, we can expect to reap hatred, and its dividend: SOCIAL VIOLENCE.

Hitler always used established perceptions of morality to sell the proposed abuses of people, and a similar situation existed with respect to black slavery. White supremacists had rationalized the idea that they were doing Black people a favor by having them as slaves! Our abuses of Native people was also based on immorality. The objective was to make them into people just like us because we believed they were seriously lacking.

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: guy.de.gia on February 05, 2012, 03:03:35 PM

[...] Therefore, one of the best "closet" situation available included their participation in the destruction of their own kind; it is now strongly suspected that Senator Joseph McCarthy who headed the American homosexual witch-hunts in the early 1950s was also homosexual. His prosecuting attorney, Roy Cohn, was definitely gay. At the time few people knew that the hunters of "dangerous", "evil," and "morally weak" homosexuals were themselves homosexual. If, however, anyone fitted negative homosexual stereotypes, it was these self-hating homo-hunters considered to be "morally righteous" because they were reflecting our society's traditional morality; this was the type of morality also used to make the desired destruction of all Native cultures appear to be righteous. We hated homosexuals and behaved accordingly, and Roy Cohn continued his abuses of homosexual people up to his death from AIDS in 1986. He had become very powerful, was very promiscuous, needed to have sex with a male at least once a day, and he could afford to have 4-5 young male prostitutes on his payroll so that his sexual needs would be met. He was strongly opposed to equal rights for gays, and was totally against the idea of having openly gay teachers in public schools.

[...] The phenomena is also similar to a "split personality" situation. One of the personalities is "the grand inquisitor," as McCarthy and Cohn had become in a spectacular way, and it needs to punish the homosexual part of their 'personality'. This internal war is also projected outward causing these socially created monsters to harm other gay males by ruining their careers or, as other males will do, punishing them may include physical assaults and even murder.

A fascinating aspect of the war waged against gays in our society is the observation that it is often being waged by repressed homosexuals who may not be homosexually active, or repressed closeted homosexuals who are having sex with males and hate themselves. The targets may be other closeted homosexuals, but the victims are more often visible "out of the closet" gay males. [...]


Well, these days things have changed a bit, taking into account the widespread acceptance of homosexuality as a lifestyle. Of course, there are still a h e l l of a lot of closeted gays - who are not out (at least as of yet). Outing is the deliberate/accidental disclosure of a gay person's sexual orientation, without his/her consent. One can out himself, of course, if he chooses to do so.

The term "glass closet" refers to the fact that even though they have not 'officially' come out, everyone knows they're gay, but acts as if they are not (just like the gay person himself does) -  one's being gay is in this case, kind of an "open secret" (usually the case with public figures). Tom Cruise is such an example. Ellen DeGeneres and Rosie O'Donnell were like that, before they finally came out.

Finally, last year Obama repealed the federal policy "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Until very lately, therefore, all gays in the military were required to have their sexual orientation sort of an "open secret" (they could be fully in the closet one more time when they're discharged and home to marry their high-school sweethearts) - but, as I said, should they have come out, they're out of the army/navy/whatever.

So, there you have it - the degrees of the closet - or "outness" - if you like. It is controversial whether outing a gay person is beneficial to the society and/or that person himself. Personally I think it does not make sense to out plain folk people, while it does to out public figures/people in authority.

Usually, the outed gay individual would go after a journalist and his newspaper who outed him. But even such lawsuits have proved unsuccessful in the long run. Here it is the Cruise's case with South Park:


The relevant "South Park" episode -- entitled "Trapped in the Closet" -- self-consciously skirts the outermost edges of the First Amendment's protection for parody. A court would probably deem it constitutionally protected, but only barely. Defamation requires a "statement of fact" -- and for this reason, most parody, because of its fictional nature, falls outside defamation law by definition.

But this is the rare parody that, fairly read, does make a statement of fact. In the episode, the animated version of Cruise literally goes into a closet, and won't come out. Other characters beg him to "come out of the closet," including the animated version of his ex-wife, Nicole Kidman. The Kidman character promises Cruise that if he comes out of the closet, neither she nor "Katie" will judge him. But the Cruise character claims he isn't "in the closet," even though he plainly is. No one could miss that the episode's creators are taking a stance and making a statement -- that the real Cruise is gay and hiding it.

The use of the euphemism "in the closet" -- used to refer to someone who is homosexual but who has not admitted his or her homosexuality to friends, family, or the public -- is transparent. Interestingly, the episode itself indicates that its creators know well that they may be defaming Cruise, and they know of his litigious history. The joke disclaimer preceding the episode announces that "All characters and events on this show -- even those based on real persons -- are entirely fictional."

At the end of the episode, the Cruise character threatens to bring a suit (not on the gay issue, but in defense of Scientology) "in England" -- which lacks a formal equivalent of the First Amendment. And all the credits at the end use the pseudonyms "John Smith" and "Jane Smith." Since the episode does indeed make a "statement of fact," the parody exception to defamation law won't save "South Park." Thus, the creators' only weapon against a possible suit by Cruise is a First Amendment defense. Fortunately for them, the Supreme Court has interpreted the defense very broadly.

[...] It's one thing to co-opt part of a song, or use a trademark, in a parody: Without using part of the original, the parody won't work at all; no one will know what its target is. But it's another thing to embed what would otherwise be a defamatory statement in a work of fiction: This is defamation in satire's clothing, and it's only in order to protect true satire that that the Constitution has been held to also protect this lesser creature. Generally, courts don't want to get into the business of picking out nuggets of fact from an otherwise fictional account. The upshot, though -- and courts know this, and accept this cost in the service of free speech -- is that parody and satire inevitably may become a refuge for rogues who seek to defame without liability. That seems to me to be just what's happening with respect to the "South Park" episode.

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: penda on February 06, 2012, 01:05:24 PM
guy.de.gia., what are you doing with this thread - are you outing, or are you being outed?

Just kidding :)
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: sed cena on February 07, 2012, 03:27:05 PM

[...]

The theory or the "model" at the base of author's reflections is Bion's model "container-contained", also called his "theory of thinking". [...] It is at one and the same time: the model of conception (penis-in-vagina), gestation (embryo-in-uterus), alimentation (nipple-in-mouth) and elimination (faeces-in-colon). This fundamental pattern -- 'one thing inside another', as Bion simply calls it -- in its many variations and permutations, forms the model for all human somatopsychological experience from the very beginning of life.

Bion posits a "place" or an "object", which he calls the "container", whose purpose is to take up a "something" which needs to be contained. Through this process both container and that-which-is-to-be-contained are transformed, and something new, a "third" element comes into being. [...] Bion's starting point is what he refers to as the "proto-mental", the somato-psychic level of experiences, consisting of emotional entities "in the raw", which to he gives the name "beta elements". According to Bion, these bits of raw sense data are, as it were, "looking for", or "in search of" a place where they can grow and be transformed into thoughts, dreams ideas, myths, etc. For in Bion's theory of thinking, all thoughts exist a priori to their being actually thought; that is to say, they are simply 'there' in some potential space/time, independent of there being a thinker to think them. Bion's image of thoughts simply being "there" without having found a thinker to think them yet, is reminiscent of Luigi Pirandello's drama "Six Characters in Search of an Author." They, too, these six characters "exist" ostensibly a priori to an author's mind having created them, and their search can be thought of as being analogous to the "searching" of thoughts for a mind, for a thinker to think them.

When these "thoughts without a thinker" find such a "nesting place" in the mind of a "host" (mother, therapist, consultant, supervisor, leader etc.) so to speak, they can then be transformed into so-called "alpha elements" through the state of mind which Bion has named "reverie", and the process which he has called "alpha function." He emphasizes, however, that he neither knows what alpha-function is or how it functions, he just knows that it does! [...] It all depends, he says, on the presence of "negative capability", i.e. the capability to take in without judging and without explanation, the ability just to "be with one's experience", to tolerate uncertainty, mystery and doubt without any "irritable grasping for facts and reason."

When the containing object (the psyche of the container) takes up the contained (i.e. the projected, the not-understood, the painful, needy, as yet uncontained, unthinkable beta elements) from the subject, it must be capable of carrying out this metabolic, disentangling process within itself, in order to be able to feed it back to the subject in small, digestible doses, so that it can now be metabolised by the subject and used for mental growth, rather than being simply expelled, "spat out" again as mentally indigestible.

Negative capability, which enables the object to "dream" (reverie) upon, to ponder and reflect upon these projected parts, requires a state of mind which Bion calls "patience" and which gradually changes into a state of mind which he calls "certainty" when the "to-be-contained" has been understood, detoxicated and re-presented to the subject. [...] This, then, is the process which, according to Bion, has to take place in every mother, in every therapist, consultant or supervisor, in every leader if he  has the intention of being helpful to his/her "baby" (patient, client, supervisee, client system, team, staff, organisation, company, nation or people), and to the extent to which the necessity of performing a containing function for those who are to follow his or her lead is both recognised and possible.


This appears to be quite interesting to me - could someone provide a link where I can read the whole thing - I mean, Bion's theory of the Container/Contained?


that guest - are you trying to be a smart a s s here, pulling our legs, or what?!

This guy is an a s s - and when I say an a s s, I mean a TOTAL A S S - and you want a link where to read all his crap?! Container-Contained, d i c k-in-a-p u s s y and * & ^ % like that!

But it's not his fault, it's the fault of all the a s s e s that read and print him!

I mean, we've read a lot of crazy stuff before, Freud too used to be a moron, but not THIS moronic! Or better to say, because we've been reading him for such a long time, we've kinda gotten used to his * & ^ % a little by little!

Anyways, looks like that's how this thing works, they see people kinda accept one guy's * & ^ %, and they go for their own * & ^ %, hoping they won't look to people as idiotic as they truly are!


Wow, blinker on, you've come a long way baby - take a look here with this other * & ^ % that I am surprised they still use it!


(http://www.avatarhosting.net/pics/6321/inkblot_hed.gif)

[...]

[...] Perhaps the Rorschach test can, as claimed, provide an "X-ray of the mind." But, asks Lilienfeld, whose mind: that of the client or the examiner?


TITCR!

You hit the nail on the @ # ! * i n g head, charisma!

;)

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: malachovsky on February 08, 2012, 03:26:13 PM

Wow, blinker on, you've come a long way baby - take a look here with this other * & ^ % that I am surprised they still use it!


Take for instance, the Rorschach test. Its inkblots are purportedly ambiguous, structureless entities which are to be given a clear structure by the interpreter. Like all projective tests, the Rorschach presents viewers with ambiguous images and asks them to interpret the images, thereby eliciting their thoughts, fears, motives, and fantasies. The 10 symmetrical inkblots used in the test (5 contain color, 5 are black and gray) are always the same, given in a specific order, and are supposed to be kept secret from the public to ensure "spontaneous" answers that give clues to people's personalities – and personality disorders. The Rorschach originally came under fire in the 1950s and '60s because it lacked standardized procedures for its administration and scoring.

[...] Projective tests like the Rorschach, the TAT (Thematic Apperception Test), which features cards with drawings of ambiguous situations, mostly featuring people, and the Draw-A-Person (clients are asked to draw a person of the same sex and the opposite sex) can take hours to administer and score, and rely heavily on examiner interpretation and, in some part, intuition. [...] Perhaps the Rorschach test can, as claimed, provide an "X-ray of the mind." But, asks Lilienfeld, whose mind: that of the client or the examiner?

(http://www.avatarhosting.net/pics/6321/inkblot_hed.gif)


TITCR!

You hit the nail on the @ # ! * i n g head, charisma!

;)


That's exactly the problem: the ambiguity of the inkblot, the fact that the same picture can be interpreted both ways, so to speak, "positively," and "negatively" - with these latter terms being relative, because what's considered "positive/relatively positive" for case (interpreter) #1, based on his/her own intuition/experience, may be the "negative/relative negative" of case (interpreter) #2, again, based on her/his intuition/experience :)

Of course, it would be nice if one would get the opinions of more than one interpreter, get like 2, or even more, in order to come to a better conclusion (something which in practice does not really happen, but we are talking what it would be happen in a perfect world, so to speak, again :)
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Country Day on February 10, 2012, 04:16:43 PM

Take Hitler: They say there is insufficient evidence that Hitler was an overt homosexual. But it seemed clear he had latent homosexual tendencies, and that he worried a lot about them. He was terribly concerned, for example, lest he give the impression of showing feminine traits - which, indeed, he did. A colleague of the himself-homosexual English diplomat and historian Sir Harold Nicolson, spoke of Hitler as being "the most profoundly feminine man that he had ever met, and that there were moments when he became almost effeminate."

Hitler also revealed fears of homosexuality by protesting so much that he had no feminine characteristics whatsoever. He was totally masculine - tough, hard, cold, ruthless, brutal. His tendency to think in terms of disjunctive stereotypes about men and women (strong, iron-willed, effective males vs. weak, emotional, incompetent female) is in itself revealing. Such thinking demonstrates a strong conflict and confusion between masculine and feminine natures. To him, sexual differences appeared as exaggerated and mutually exclusive opposites, as roles to be played, rather as natural attributes of human personality. In Hitler's case, as in Himmler's, the fantasized tough male role developed into sadism, murder and destruction.

The question of Hitler's latent homosexuality can also be approached indirectly. It can be stated with some confidence that Hitler must have had latent homosexual tendencies because he showed clear indications of paranoia. This does not mean that all homosexuals are paranoid, but it does mean that all paranoids have fears of homosexuality. The direct connection between homosexuality and paranoia was first noticed by Freud, who concluded that paranoia "invariably arises from an attempt to subdue an unduly powerful homosexual wish."

There is a terrifically strong need to deny homosexuality; the very thought of sexual contact with another man is "completely intolerable." Moreover, the need felt by a paranoid for approval is especially acute; his megalomania is in itself an expression of his need for proof that he is important. There is a high incidence of constipation in paranoid individuals. All paranoids have strong anal components, problems with order and cleanliness, and obsessions with purity and vice, as well as impurity and infections of others. Anal sadistic fantasies are directed towards the father, because he is seen as the rival for the mother's love; the intensity of the drive to be loved is supported mainly "by the intense need to neutralize and erotisize a tremendous hate." When the unconscious hate is so great, the attempt to erotisize it fails, and the individual turns to sadism.

While homosexual feeling and paranoid delusions may be in bitter conflict, both are, in a sense, dependent on each other and are defenses against one another. Thus, it seems quite possible that Hitler developed paranoid delusions, in part, to fight his homosexual feelings. As long as he persecuted and attacked homosexuals, he felt he was successfully combating his own inadmissible inclinations toward homosexuality.


Does the latter mean that, Hitler called, for instance, Jews homosexuals (allegedly undermining the manliness and and fighting spirit of the German people) in part to fight his unacceptable homosexual feelings? Or, that he judged so many other people as being inferior, lacking that perceived German "manliness" and "fighting spirit," as it was the case with Communists, liberals, gypsies, homosexuals, victims of warfare, etc?!

Distancing now a bit from the homosexual part of the equation, to fully address the paranoia one, we would have to add that when concocting the Jews conspiracy he mixed antisemitism and stereotypes of the Jews as Communists, as subversives and all kinds of other things - as a means to an end. Jews became a scapegoat for Germany's economic problems - enough to remind people of that conspiracy of "Jewish bankers" (Remember Fräulein Kost's line from "Cabaret," when asking, "If all the Jews are bankers, then how can they be Communists, too?")

A distinctive feature of Hitler's antisemitism was that it was formulated as conspiracy theory. For many, especially in Bavaria, this went hand in hand with the 'stab-in-the-back' theory, that is, with the view that Germany had not been defeated on the battlefield but had been brought down by liberal, socialist and Communist subversives on the home front. In other words, it was claimed that "the Jews had caused Germany's defeat in World War 1." Potentially, this made antisemitism explosive in Germany.

As we try to understand Holocaust, we'd have to also explain a bit the Darwinian biology of the time. There was a growing sense that there were those in society who were 'biologically' inferior and that for a 'fit' world to survive and thrive, those who were 'unfit' should be done away with. Instead of letting nature take its course, there was a unspoken sense that humans could take matters into their own hands. So when Hitler took power he started rounding all these people up. He used the Jews, Poles, gays, gypsies, Russians and mentally challenged people as slave labor and then started to annihilate them in gas chambers. He classed the above mentioned people as sub-human and basically in his Nazi world there was no place for the "sub-human", only the 'Aryans'.


First of all, great avatar, applewasp! You appear to make some very interesting observations in relation to the homosexual/paranoia equation that seems particularly relevant to types like Hitler (Nazis) - how an enemy is made out of, how the projection works in such a way so as to provide the "convincing" evidence that the enemy really has the attributes ascribed to them (the projection "content").
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Saction8 on February 13, 2012, 02:56:40 PM

No need to get overexcited about the "right to bear arms." You have to remember that in Western democracies (especially America) the police maintains the public order with an iron hand. Just beacause you have a gun it does not mean that you will use it -- in fact, the majority of people get a gun "for the fun of it," as an insurance that were they attacked they'd be able to get back to the attacker. However, the possibility of being attacked in middle class neighborhoods is minimal and these people almost never put their guns to use. It is not like in some countries where there are virtually no laws and people set the record straight themselves. It is in these countries that the right to bear arms would prove detrimental. For instance, it is well-known that in ex-communist countries journalists are beaten randomly when they publish discrediting articles about a political figure of their country. Not to mention that even politicians themselves have been treated like * & ^ % in these countries (Russia, for instance). Intelligence services' agents have beaten political adversaries of their superiors so bad that they have nearly died; or their houses have come under heavy gun fire. Assassination attempts towards high level government figures are random even after so many years of trying to establish democratic societies.


Where are you from brace?
Title: Re: PI
Post by: pobis on February 13, 2012, 05:03:27 PM

[...] People have no rights and he, the psychopath, has no obligations that derive from the "social contract." The psychopath holds himself to be above conventional morality and the law. The psychopath cannot delay gratification. He wants everything and wants it now. His whims, urges, catering to his needs, and the satisfaction of his drives take precedence over the needs, preferences, and emotions of even his nearest and dearest.

Consequently, psychopaths feel no remorse when they hurt or defraud others. They don't possess even the most rudimentary conscience. They rationalize their (often criminal) behavior and intellectualize it. Psychopaths fall prey to their own primitive defense mechanisms (such as narcissism, splitting, and projection). [...] The psychopath projects his own vulnerabilities, weaknesses, and shortcomings unto others and force them to behave the way he expects them to (this defense mechanism is known as "projective identification") [...]


As to the mechanism you mention - I have read about a similar concept in social psychology - that of self-fulfilling prophecy, a process in which we find confirmation and proof for our stereotypes by creating stereotypical behavior in out-group members through our treatment of them. Word, Zanna & Cooper in 1974 conducted a set of experiments that shows such. In the first study, they asked white students to interview job applicants who were either white or black. The students tended to display discomfort when interviewing the blacks; for instance, they sat further away, stammered, and ended the interview earlier. In a second study, the researchers varied the behavior of the student interviewers so that the latter acted towards a job applicant either the way that the interviewers had acted towards whites or the way they had acted towards blacks in the first study. They found that those applicants who had been interviewed in the way that blacks had been interviewed were judged to be more nervous and less effective than the others.


No kidding, Violet Bear - PI appears to be "the man" - here it is a related post on how groups rely on the phenomenon to function


Fight/Flight mentality and the choice of a leader in the Fight/Flight group

As to the choice of a leader for a fight/flight group, Bion says:

Quote
"It is usually a man or woman with marked paranoid trends; perhaps, if the presence of an enemy is not immediately obvious to the group, the next best thing is for the group to choose a leader to whom it is."
 

This statement is important for several reasons. First, it makes it obvious that, according to Bion, it is not the leader who chooses his group -- neither according to his own needs or his perception of the group's needs -- but much more the basic assumption group which seeks and chooses its appropriate leader according to its (unconscious) needs. And second, the group's need to find an enemy, against whom they can either fight or from which they can flee, exists even before that enemy has been found, discovered or, indeed, invented. In other words, one might say, that if the Jews hadn't been there already for the Nazis to identify as the enemy, responsible for their miserable plight, the Nazis would have had to invent them! And as for the leadership role in this fight/flight dynamic, the German people were highly successful in picking a personality from among their ranks (who was, of course not even a German, but an Austrian!), and whose capacities as a leader of the fight/flight basic assumption have remained virtually unparalleled in history, Adolph Hitler. According to Bion, leadership is a product of the group mentality, not its origin. He writes:

Quote
The leader, on the basic assumption level, does not create the group by virtue of his fanatical adherence to an idea, but is rather an individual whose personality renders him peculiarly susceptible to the obliteration of individuality by the basic group's leadership requirements.

And here Bion links this phenomenon with the Kleinian theory of projective identification:

Quote
To me the leader is as much the creature of the basic assumption as any other member of the group, and this, I think, is to be expected if we envisage identification of the individual with the leader as depending not on introjection alone but on a simultaneous process of projective identification.


This "loss of individual distinctiveness" applies to the leader as much as to anyone else.

Thus the leader in the fight/flight group, for example, appears to have a distinctive personality because his personality is of a kind that lends itself to exploitation by the group demand for a leader who requires of it only a capacity for fighting or for flight; the leader has no greater freedom to be himself than any other member of the group. Bion compares this leader with

Quote
"an automaton who has ceased to be guided by his own will. He is leader by virtue of his capacity for instantaneous, involuntary combination with every other member of his group and only differs from them in that, whatever his function in the work group, he is the incarnation of the basic assumption group leader.


Bion points out that it is incapable of tolerating frustration in the long run, because in the sphere of basic assumption phenomena, time itself is not a relevant, not even an existent dimension of reality. Flight offers an immediately available opportunity for expression of the emotion in the fight/flight group and therefore meets the demand for instantaneous satisfaction -- therefore the group will take flight. Alternatively, attack offers a similarly immediate outlet -- then the group will fight. The fight/flight group will follow any leader who will give such orders as license instantaneous flight or instantaneous attack.

[...]

Containment as a leadership style -- where does it come from?

How containing the style of the leader and how given to blaming others when things go wrong (paranoid/schizoid position) versus acknowledging one's or one's institution's contribution towards the trouble one is in (depressive position), depends to a very large degree on the individual's capacity to maintain a relatively mature stance as opposed to falling into a defensive/paranoid one, and this capacity is based on early experiences and their later reworking as the life-cycle progresses. The assumption underlying this aspect of psychoanalytic theory suggests that the conditions necessary in order for a proper Container-Contained relationship in the Bionic sense to come into being are:

a) when an individual has him/herself had sufficient experience of containment in the course of his or her personal development, and
b) when s/he has thereby developed a capacity to identify both with the container as well as with "being contained" and then, through the process of introjective identification, has been able to include this as a significant and stable aspect of his or her own internal life.

This developmental process thus enables one to increase one's capacity to contain, and to employ containment of anxiety as a psychic tool, which can then be utilised as necessary in the authoritative execution of leadership roles.


Very interesting, the-Q-card, but there's another post, an even more interesting, post on this whole thing -
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: pobis on February 13, 2012, 05:04:10 PM

[...] We could think of two or three things which might rescue us from experiencing Freud's reductionism as hopelessly ignorant of the importance of social causation. The first is to look deeper and investigative how certain public values and structures get into the unconscious before they get projected and rationalized as the public interest. [...] Bion takes us further into the lowest depths -- the most primitive and most refractory defences of all. He put the point clearly in the conclusion to his essay, "Group Dynamics -- A Review," which was more explicit about the Kleinian inspiration of his ideas than his better-known collection of essays, "Experiences in Groups" Bion says, "Freud's view of the dynamics of the group seems to me to require supplementing rather than correction" [...]

[...]

Following on from Bion's experiences in groups, Elliott Jaques and Isabel Menzies Lyth conducted research in various organizations and found the same mechanisms at work, with the defences embodied in the mores and structures of the institutions. I believe that this model is at work in innumerable situations -- neighborhood gang, school, workplace, country club, religion, racial, political and international conflict. When one comes into contact with the group, subculture or institution, the psychic price of admission is to enter into that group's splits and projective identifications.

In her classical paper on "The Function of Social Systems as a Defence Against Anxiety," Menzies Lyth describes the link as it applies to student nurses: "[...] I have used the term "social defence system" as a construct to describe certain features of the nursing service as a continuing social institution, I wish to make it clear that I do not imply that the nursing service as an institution operates the defences. Defences are, and can be, operated only by individuals. Their behavior is the link between their psychic defences and the institution'. There is a complex and subtle interaction, resulting in a matching between the individual's defences and the institution's. The processes 'depend heavily on repeated projection of the psychic defence system into the social defence system and repeated introjection of the social defence system into the psychic defence system. This allows continuous testing of the match and fit as the individual experiences his own and other people's reactions.

'The social defence system of the nursing service has been described as a historical development through collusive interaction between individuals to project and reify relevant elements of their psychic defence systems. However, from the viewpoint of the new entrant to the nursing service, the social defence system at the time of entry is a datum, an aspect of external reality to which she must react and adapt. Fenichel [...] states that social institutions arise through the efforts of human beings to satisfy their needs, but that social institutions then become external realities comparatively independent of individuals which affect the structure of the individual. The student nurse has to adapt her defences to those of the institution.

The latter are relatively immutable, so she shapes hers until they are congruent with the institution's. [...] Thus, the individual cannot bring the content of the phantasy anxiety situations into effective contact with reality. Unrealistic or pathological anxiety cannot be differentiated from realistic anxiety arising from real dangers.

Therefore, anxiety tends to remain permanently at a level determined more by the phantasies than by the reality. The forced introjection of the hospital defence system, therefore, perpetuates in the individual a considerable degree of pathological anxiety.

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: pobis on February 13, 2012, 05:16:13 PM

[...] Crucial to understand how a person comes to think and feel like a racist or a virulent nationalist or a member of a street gang or a religious or psychoanalytic sect. The mechanisms are the same and that the process of taking in the values as 'a given', adapting one's own primitive anxieties to that group's particular version of splitting, projection, stereotyping and scapegoating, leads to the same kind of impoverishment that nurses experience -- of the ability to think and feel with moderation and to deal with reality and anxiety.

It is projected into the structure or the Other and given back -- not detoxified, but -- as an injunction to behave inhumanely toward patients, Lacanians, Jews, Armenians, 'the Evil Empire' or whomsoever. It is by this means that we became certain, without thinking about it or meeting many, if any, of the people involved, that Germans are sadistic, Japanese cunning, Italians sexist, Mexicans lazy, French romantic, English decent, Scots dour, Canadians boring, Swiss efficient, Dutch tidy, Scandinavians cold, Spaniards romantic, Russians passionate, Turks depraved, Arabs fanatical, Jews avaricious, Hawaiians friendly, Australians gauche, Chinese inscrutable, Africans rhythmic, White South Africans racist and authoritarian. We have been sure of all these things all our conscious lives, but we do not recall learning any of them.

We are dealing with a whole new level of grip. It's done with superglue -- cemented or bonded with the most primitive level of feeling that we have. [...] Members do it with projective identification.' Members of families, couples, groups, institutions, tribes, cultures and so on. [...] What is true of worms served up as food for birds is also true of people with respect to prejudices and other deeply held beliefs. They become so deeply implanted or sedimented that they are 'second nature'. [...] First we project our destructiveness into others; then we wish to annihilate them without guilt because they contain all the evil and destructiveness. When we read accounts of the genocide of the Conquistadors, the Stalinists, the Germans, the Kampucheans, the Americans or the Iraqis, we must ask what has been projected into these people from the most primitive parts of their tormentors. [...]

[...] What is being a fan of a movie star or a groupie of a rock star other than romantic, idealizing projective identification? Where positive aspects of the self are forcefully projected similar degrees of depersonalization occur, with feelings of personal worthlessness and with dependent worship of the other's contrasting strengths, powers, uncanny sensitivity, marvellous gifts, thoughts, knowledge, undying goodness etc. This is the world of the devotee, cults and hero-promotion.

It is also a world in which people will do anything a Bagwan or a Rev. James Jones tells them to do -- from sexual license to mass suicide. The same suspension of one's own sense of right and wrong is at work in the followers L. Ron Hubbard in the Church of Scientology as in the minds of the devotees of Charles Manson, killing rich Californians, and in the convictions of bombers and perpetrators of sectarian murders in Northern Ireland or terrorists from Lybia, though the ideologies of the respective group leaders may have utterly different apparent of real justifications.

[...] A further group presence in the unconscious is in the notion of 'pathological organizations' in borderline psychotic states, the subject of a burgeoning literature. In discussing this, Herbert Rosenfeld explicitly describes the individual as in projective identification with a 'gang in the mind': "The destructive narcissism of these patients appears often highly organized, as if one were dealing with a powerful gang dominated by a leader, who control all the members of the gang to see that they support one another in making the criminal destructive work more efficient and powerful.

However, the narcissistic organization not only increases the strength of the destructive narcissism, but it has a defensive purpose to keep itself in power and so maintain the status quo. The main aim seems to be to prevent the weakening of the organization and to control the members of the gang so that they will not desert the destructive organization and join the positive parts of the self or betray the secrets of the gang to the police.

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: entitatitivity on February 15, 2012, 01:42:32 PM

[...]

So, there you have it - the degrees of the closet - or "outness" - if you like. It is controversial whether outing a gay person is beneficial to the society and/or that person himself. Personally I think it does not make sense to out plain folk people, while it does to out public figures/people in authority.

Usually, the outed gay individual would go after a journalist and his newspaper who outed him. But even such lawsuits have proved unsuccessful in the long run. Here it is the Cruise's case with South Park:


The relevant "South Park" episode -- entitled "Trapped in the Closet" -- self-consciously skirts the outermost edges of the First Amendment's protection for parody. A court would probably deem it constitutionally protected, but only barely. Defamation requires a "statement of fact" -- and for this reason, most parody, because of its fictional nature, falls outside defamation law by definition.

But this is the rare parody that, fairly read, does make a statement of fact. In the episode, the animated version of Cruise literally goes into a closet, and won't come out. Other characters beg him to "come out of the closet," including the animated version of his ex-wife, Nicole Kidman. The Kidman character promises Cruise that if he comes out of the closet, neither she nor "Katie" will judge him. But the Cruise character claims he isn't "in the closet," even though he plainly is. No one could miss that the episode's creators are taking a stance and making a statement -- that the real Cruise is gay and hiding it.

The use of the euphemism "in the closet" -- used to refer to someone who is homosexual but who has not admitted his or her homosexuality to friends, family, or the public -- is transparent. Interestingly, the episode itself indicates that its creators know well that they may be defaming Cruise, and they know of his litigious history. The joke disclaimer preceding the episode announces that "All characters and events on this show -- even those based on real persons -- are entirely fictional."

At the end of the episode, the Cruise character threatens to bring a suit (not on the gay issue, but in defense of Scientology) "in England" -- which lacks a formal equivalent of the First Amendment. And all the credits at the end use the pseudonyms "John Smith" and "Jane Smith." Since the episode does indeed make a "statement of fact," the parody exception to defamation law won't save "South Park." Thus, the creators' only weapon against a possible suit by Cruise is a First Amendment defense. Fortunately for them, the Supreme Court has interpreted the defense very broadly.

[...] It's one thing to co-opt part of a song, or use a trademark, in a parody: Without using part of the original, the parody won't work at all; no one will know what its target is. But it's another thing to embed what would otherwise be a defamatory statement in a work of fiction: This is defamation in satire's clothing, and it's only in order to protect true satire that that the Constitution has been held to also protect this lesser creature. Generally, courts don't want to get into the business of picking out nuggets of fact from an otherwise fictional account. The upshot, though -- and courts know this, and accept this cost in the service of free speech -- is that parody and satire inevitably may become a refuge for rogues who seek to defame without liability. That seems to me to be just what's happening with respect to the "South Park" episode.


I'm not sure I understand the "statement of fact" thing stressed upon by the lawyer here - SP maintains that the whole thing is a parody, characters are all fictional - everything seems OK, with the FA protection in mind.

I mean, you have tabloids (papers) claiming outright that Cruise is gay - I just don't get the overanalyzing kind of thing that the Yale lawyer is doing in the case of SP.

(http://s18.postimage.org/o9ujjmdqv/enquirer_tomssecretlife_798x1024.jpg)

http://www.celebitchy.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/enquirer_tomssecretlife-798x1024.jpg
Title: Re: About "Common Sense"
Post by: entitatitivity on February 15, 2012, 02:10:19 PM
This is the kind of analyzing that you do only when you are a law student with your law professors:

Burglary = The breaking and entering the house of another in the night time, with intent to commit a felony therein, whether the felony be actually committed or not.

- Breaking can be either actual, such as by forcing open a door, or constructive, such as by fraud or threats. Breaking does not require that anything be "broken" in terms of physical damage occurring. A person who has permission to enter part of a house, but not another part, commits a breaking and entering when they use any means to enter a room where they are not permitted, so long as the room was not open to enter.

- Entering can involve either physical entry by a person or the insertion of an instrument with which to remove property. Insertion of a tool to gain entry may not constitute entering by itself. Note that there must be a breaking and an entering for common law burglary. Breaking without entry or entry without breaking is not sufficient for common law burglary.
   
- Although rarely listed as an element, the common law required that entry occur as a consequence of the breaking. For example, if a wrongdoer partially opened a window by using a pry bar and then noticed an open door through which he entered the dwelling, there is no burglary at common law. The use of the pry bar would not constitute an entry even if a portion of the prybar "entered" the residence. Under the instrumentality rule the use of an instrument to effect a breaking would not constitute an entry. However, if any part of the perpetrator's body entered the residence in an attempt to gain entry, the instrumentality rule did not apply. Thus, if the perpetrator uses the prybar to pry open the window and then used his hands to lift the partially opened window, an "entry" would have taken place when he grasped the bottom of the window with his hands.

- House includes a temporarily unoccupied dwelling, but not a building used only occasionally as a habitation
   
- Night time is defined as hours between half an hour after sunset and half an hour before sunrise

- Typically this element is expressed as the intent to commit a felony "therein." The use of the word "therein" adds nothing and certainly does not limit the scope of burglary to those wrongdoers who break and enter a dwelling intending to commit a felony on the premises. The situs of the felony does not matter, and burglary occurs if the wrongdoer intended to commit a felony at the time he broke and entered.


NOW, we all know, that out there in the real world things are not handled this way - stressing upon each word like crazy! What I am saying is that in practice - for lawyers too - common sense is the one that applies. Or to put it in those other words, KISS!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: pick on February 15, 2012, 03:28:37 PM

But of course - these are the kinds of nihilistic killers - there is a movie "Mr. Brooks" which depicts a guy who killed people for the hell of it..


Examining his modus operandi, from the fastidious preparation and cleaning up of the crime scene before departing, it looks like Brooks was obsessed with not getting caught (he responds to Smith's inquiry as to whether the person they would agree on killing could be someone who he knew, by saying, that you never kill someone you know, that's the surest way to get caught) - and yet, as Smith lies dying, Brooks reveals that he used many different MOs before becoming the meticulous Thumbprint Killer.


Serial offenders modify and perfect their MO as they become more adept at what they do. The improvement or slight adjustment to an offender's MO is something for investigators to bear in mind in analyzing a criminal pattern over time and formulating a behavioral profile. This is especially true in the first stages of profiling when the investigator begins his or her profile from the paradigm of the Organized/Disorganized continuum.


L Liberty, how about copy-cat crimes - offenders that copy the MO/signature of other offenders reported in the media or described in fiction?
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Metodi on February 16, 2012, 03:37:37 PM

[...]

There are, however, other ways that similar types of defenses against the homosexual self-label can be articulated. These males to be "homophobic, gay-bashing hoodlums who pick up or are picked up by a gay male, have sex with him, and they exorcise their own homosexual guilt by assaulting and maybe killing him. The "exorcist syndrome" which is a version of the "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" nature manifested by people like Cardinal Spellman and Roy Cohn. The phenomena is also similar to a "split personality" situation. One of the personalities is "the grand inquisitor," as McCarthy and Cohn had become in a spectacular way, and it needs to punish the homosexual part of their 'personality'. This internal war is also projected outward causing these socially created monsters to harm other gay males by ruining their careers or, as other males will do, punishing them may include physical assaults and even murder.

[...]


Here's another parallel from poster maj:

Quote


[...] The "grandiosity gap" - the painful and narcissistically injurious gap between their grandiose fantasies and their dreary and humiliating reality - becomes emotionally insupportable. They decompensate and act out. [...] Unbeknownst to them, they seek self punishment. They are at heart suicidal. [...] This is called "projective identification". They attribute evil and corruption to their enemies and foes. These forms of paranoia are called projection and splitting. These are all primitive, infantile, and often persecutory, defence mechanisms.

When coupled with narcissism - the inability to empathize, the exploitativeness, the sense of entitlement, the rages, the dehumanization and devaluation of others - this mindset yields abysmal contempt for the narcissist's victims. The overriding emotion of terrorists and serial killers, the amalgam and culmination of their tortured psyche - is deep seated disdain for everything human, the flip side of envy. It is cognitive dissonance gone amok. [...] To justify this apparent contradiction, the mass murderer casts himself as an altruistic savior of a group of people "endangered" by his foes. [...]

[...] Their cosmic significance is daily sustained by newspaper headlines, ever increasing bounties, admiring copycats, successful acts of blackmail, the strength and size of their opponents, and the devastation of human life and property. Appeasement works only to aggravate their drives and strengthen their appetites by emboldening them and by raising the threshold of excitation and "narcissistic supply". Terrorists and killers are addicted to this drug of being acknowledged and reflected. They derive their sense of existence, parasitically, from the reactions of their (often captive) audience.

Erich Fromm suggested that both Hitler and Stalin were narcissistic mass murderers. Hitler and Nazism are often portrayed as an apocalyptic and seismic break with European history. Yet the truth is that they were the culmination and reification of European history in the 19th century. Europe's annals of colonialism have prepared it for the range of phenomena associated with the Nazi regime - from industrial murder to racial theories, from slave labor to the forcible annexation of territory. [...] Moreover, Nazi Germany innovated by applying prevailing racial theories (usually reserved to non-whites) to the white race itself. It started with the Jews - a non-controversial proposition - but then expanded them to include "east European" whites, such as the Poles and the Russians. Germany was not alone in its malignant nationalism. [...] Nazism - and Fascism - were world ideologies, adopted enthusiastically in places as diverse as Iraq, Egypt, Norway, Latin America, and Britain. At the end of the 1930's, liberal capitalism, communism, and fascism (and its mutations) were locked in mortal battle of ideologies. [...]

[...]

What was the role of the Jews in all this? [...] The Jews constituted a perfect, easily identifiable, reification of all that was "wrong" with Europe. They were an old nation, they were eerily disembodied (without a territory), they were cosmopolitan, they were part of the establishment, they were "decadent", they were hated on religious and socio-economic grounds, they were different, they were narcissistic (felt and acted as morally superior), they were everywhere, they were defenseless, they were credulous, they were adaptable (and thus could be co-opted to collaborate in their own destruction). They were the perfect hated father figure and parricide was in fashion.

[...]
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: citifax on February 24, 2012, 01:03:12 PM
Is the the "devil's advocate" role that you call "stance," Habibe? I didn’t even know the word – you could definitely make a great writer!

Quote

(http://www.freeimagehosting.net/newuploads/vfj9o.jpg)

http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/index.php?topic=3006869.msg5398330#msg5398330

Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: B Ashton on February 28, 2012, 12:57:36 PM

Delusional Disorder is indeed horrible - I remember some years ago when my neighbor, a twenty-nine-years old male, approached the authorities (the police) and asked them for protection; he told them his life was in danger because of a group of individuals who were following and harassing him on a daily basis for over a year or so. His wife told the police no actual threat had been made by anyone. He was functioning rather satisfactorily in work and his social relations and did not appear to have any other complaints. The police believed him initially and had several people watch him for a time period, only to discover that no one was, in actuality, following the guy. He was referred for psychiatric evaluation and found to suffer from delusional disorder.


Mental breakdown is all too common during times of war, anarchy and turmoil. I remember when I was once in Africa people were suffering from all kinds of stress-related disorders when all of a sudden there was no rule of law, with the State not functioning at all. The country descended in anarchy and violence, the goverment was toppled and some 2,000 people were killed. The entire country fell under the control of rebels and criminal gangs.

Guns became available to just about anyone, with fears on the part of people that old scores were going to be settled. In fact, rebels took even control of 19 combat aircraft type "MiG," let alone military vehicles and tanks.
Title: Re: PI
Post by: c o l o m b u s on February 29, 2012, 03:36:04 PM

Very interesting! Here it is a more complete summary of Bion:

Come follow, follow, follow, follow, follow, follow me!
Whither shall I follow, follow, follow,
Whither shall I follow, follow thee?
To the greenwood, to the greenwood,
To the greenwood, greenwood tree!

In this well-known old song, an English canon composed by John Hilton in 1652, we are encouraged to follow an invisible leader. But before we decide to do so, we ask him "whither shall I follow? Whither shall I follow thee?" The answer sounds tempting: "to the greenwood tree..." So,... off we go!... Or perhaps not?


Bion's Theory of Thinking -- "Container-Contained"

The theory or the "model" at the base of author's reflections is Bion's model "container-contained", also called his "theory of thinking". The relationship between container and contained is central to Bion's thinking seeing it as basic, a ubiquitous pattern of relationships which, as it were, biologically pre-programmed. In other words, it is one of nature's key patterns. It is at one and the same time: the model of conception (penis-in-vagina), gestation (embryo-in-uterus), alimentation (nipple-in-mouth) and elimination (faeces-in-colon).

This fundamental pattern -- 'one thing inside another', as Bion simply calls it -- in its many variations and permutations, forms the model for all human somatopsychological experience from the very beginning of life. Bion posits a "place" or an "object", which he calls the "container", whose purpose is to take up a "something" which needs to be contained. Through this process both container and that-which-is-to-be-contained are transformed, and something new, a "third" element comes into being. From this biological pattern, Bion develops his model of the origin of the ability to think, which, for him, is a precondition for his central developmental concept, "learning from experience" [...]

Fight/Flight mentality and the choice of a leader in the Fight/Flight group

As to the choice of a leader for a fight/flight group, Bion says:

Quote
"It is usually a man or woman with marked paranoid trends; perhaps, if the presence of an enemy is not immediately obvious to the group, the next best thing is for the group to choose a leader to whom it is."
 

This statement is important for several reasons. First, it makes it obvious that, according to Bion, it is not the leader who chooses his group -- neither according to his own needs or his perception of the group's needs -- but much more the basic assumption group which seeks and chooses its appropriate leader according to its (unconscious) needs.

And second, the group's need to find an enemy, against whom they can either fight or from which they can flee, exists even before that enemy has been found, discovered or, indeed, invented. In other words, one might say, that if the Jews hadn't been there already for the Nazis to identify as the enemy, responsible for their miserable plight, the Nazis would have had to invent them!

And as for the leadership role in this fight/flight dynamic, the German people were highly successful in picking a personality from among their ranks (who was, of course not even a German, but an Austrian!), and whose capacities as a leader of the fight/flight basic assumption have remained virtually unparalleled in history, Adolph Hitler.

According to Bion, leadership is a product of the group mentality, not its origin. He writes:

Quote
The leader, on the basic assumption level, does not create the group by virtue of his fanatical adherence to an idea, but is rather an individual whose personality renders him peculiarly susceptible to the obliteration of individuality by the basic group's leadership requirements.

And here Bion links this phenomenon with the Kleinian theory of projective identification:

Quote
To me the leader is as much the creature of the basic assumption as any other member of the group, and this, I think, is to be expected if we envisage identification of the individual with the leader as depending not on introjection alone but on a simultaneous process of projective identification.


This "loss of individual distinctiveness" applies to the leader as much as to anyone else.

Thus the leader in the fight/flight group, for example, appears to have a distinctive personality because his personality is of a kind that lends itself to exploitation by the group demand for a leader who requires of it only a capacity for fighting or for flight; the leader has no greater freedom to be himself than any other member of the group. [...]

Bion points out that it is incapable of tolerating frustration in the long run, because in the sphere of basic assumption phenomena, time itself is not a relevant, not even an existent dimension of reality. Flight offers an immediately available opportunity for expression of the emotion in the fight/flight group and therefore meets the demand for instantaneous satisfaction -- therefore the group will take flight. Alternatively, attack offers a similarly immediate outlet -- then the group will fight. The fight/flight group will follow any leader who will give such orders as license instantaneous flight or instantaneous attack.

[...]


I highlighted the part of the post I am not sure it's coherent with the rest - anyone cares to explain a bit? :)
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: C a s i n o on March 02, 2012, 02:09:56 PM

Very interesting! Here it is a more complete summary of Bion:

Come follow, follow, follow, follow, follow, follow me!
Whither shall I follow, follow, follow,
Whither shall I follow, follow thee?
To the greenwood, to the greenwood,
To the greenwood, greenwood tree!

In this well-known old song, an English canon composed by John Hilton in 1652, we are encouraged to follow an invisible leader. But before we decide to do so, we ask him "whither shall I follow? Whither shall I follow thee?" The answer sounds tempting: "to the greenwood tree..." So,... off we go!... Or perhaps not?


Bion's Theory of Thinking -- "Container-Contained"

The theory or the "model" at the base of author's reflections is Bion's model "container-contained", also called his "theory of thinking". The relationship between container and contained is central to Bion's thinking seeing it as basic, a ubiquitous pattern of relationships which, as it were, biologically pre-programmed. In other words, it is one of nature's key patterns. It is at one and the same time: the model of conception (penis-in-vagina), gestation (embryo-in-uterus), alimentation (nipple-in-mouth) and elimination (faeces-in-colon).


I highlighted the part of the post I am not sure it's coherent with the rest - anyone cares to explain a bit? :)


colo, I guess it means that people find it difficult to organize in that-ideal-form-of-social-rule and that not rarely they give consent to be ruled by people who just have the courage to go ahead and lead (rule) others the way they will. It may not be the best/worst way possible, it may be close (enough), but who knows/will ever know?! 

Not to mention that old sayin' "Old men start wars and young men fight them!"
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Dhorothea on March 03, 2012, 03:32:23 PM

But of course - these are the kinds of nihilistic killers - there is a movie "Mr. Brooks" which depicts a guy who killed people for the hell of it..


Examining his modus operandi, from the fastidious preparation and cleaning up of the crime scene before departing, it looks like Brooks was obsessed with not getting caught (he responds to Smith's inquiry as to whether the person they would agree on killing could be someone who he knew, by saying, that you never kill someone you know, that's the surest way to get caught) - and yet, as Smith lies dying, Brooks reveals that he used many different MOs before becoming the meticulous Thumbprint Killer.


Serial offenders modify and perfect their MO as they become more adept at what they do. The improvement or slight adjustment to an offender's MO is something for investigators to bear in mind in analyzing a criminal pattern over time and formulating a behavioral profile. This is especially true in the first stages of profiling when the investigator begins his or her profile from the paradigm of the Organized/Disorganized continuum.


L Liberty, how about copy-cat crimes - offenders that copy the MO/signature of other offenders reported in the media or described in fiction?


What exactly is the "signature" thing you mention, pick?
Title: Re: Money - The Gold Standard
Post by: bfi on March 05, 2012, 02:28:35 PM
Quote

The Well Hidden Truth

A quaint story of an obscure primitive village existing long before our times? Could this unsophisticated money system possibly have anything in common with our modern technical society? Believe it or not, this allegory represents all of the basic elements of our modern money. Of course we do not use gold, but gold is usually the only solution offered as the logical recourse for the current system, while all fingers point damningly at our fiat currency (money that does not have a value of its own). As you can see such a solution is bogus disinformation designed to mislead those that question the system. All are careful never to mention the true value of money, which is labor. Yes we do have a fiat money system, but the creation and distribution of our fiat money is corrupt, and works just the same as the gold coins in the preceding allegory. Just as the gold coins were created and loaned out by the alchemist, our money is created and loaned into circulation by the Federal Reserve, as if it already had value.

The truth is, this money is worthless just as the wooden coins where worthless until after they were worked for. Because the powers that be have convinced us that our fiat money somehow has a magical value of its own (just because they say it does) and they alone have acquired the power to create and distribute it, they can easily manipulate its value. The village council represents our Federal Government, which has become corrupt, bought and paid for by those that control our money. The group of wealthy business men represents our monopoly corporations, that work hand and glove with our corrupt government and the money masters. And the Baker represents what could happen if the word ever got out to enough people regarding the esoteric secrets of money, and how it is used as a tool to steal our labor, and make us all into their willing slaves.

An interesting post from the other thread this one.

(http://moneypress.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/gold-bars-for-sale1.jpg)

Well, the gold standard is a monetary system in which the standard economic unit of account is a fixed weight of gold. There are distinct kinds of gold standard. First, the gold specie standard is a system in which the monetary unit is associated with circulating gold coins, or with the unit of value defined in terms of one particular circulating gold coin in conjunction with subsidiary coinage made from a lesser valuable metal.

Similarly, the gold exchange standard typically involves the circulation of only coins made of silver or other metals, but where the authorities guarantee a fixed exchange rate with another country that is on the gold standard. This creates a de facto gold standard, in that the value of the silver coins has a fixed external value in terms of gold that is independent of the inherent silver value. Finally, the gold bullion standard is a system in which gold coins do not circulate, but in which the authorities have agreed to sell gold bullion on demand at a fixed price in exchange for the circulating currency.

No country currently uses the gold standard as the basis of their monetary system, although several hold substantial gold reserves.

Commodity money is inconvenient to store and transport. Further, it does not allow a government to manipulate or restrict the flow of commerce within its dominion with the same ease that a fiat currency does. As such, commodity money gave way to representative money, and gold and other specie were retained as its backing. Gold was a common form of money due to its rarity, durability, divisibility, fungibility, and ease of identification, often in conjunction with silver. Silver was typically the main circulating medium, with gold as the metal of monetary reserve.

The gold standard variously specified how the gold backing would be implemented, including the amount of specie per currency unit. The currency itself is just paper and so has no intrinsic value, but is accepted by traders because it can be redeemed any time for the equivalent specie. A U.S. silver certificate, for example, could be redeemed for an actual piece of silver.

Representative money and the gold standard protect citizens from hyperinflation and other abuses of monetary policy, as were seen in some countries during the Great Depression. However, they were not without their problems and critics, and so were partially abandoned via the international adoption of the Bretton Woods System. That system eventually collapsed in 1971, at which time nearly all nations had switched to full fiat money.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: stayover on March 08, 2012, 12:39:21 PM

Mental breakdown is all too common during times of war, anarchy and turmoil. I remember when I was once in Africa people were suffering from all kinds of stress-related disorders when all of a sudden there was no rule of law, with the State not functioning at all. The country descended in anarchy and violence, the goverment was toppled and some 2,000 people were killed. The entire country fell under the control of rebels and criminal gangs.

Guns became available to just about anyone, with fears on the part of people that old scores were going to be settled. In fact, rebels took even control of 19 combat aircraft type "MiG," let alone military vehicles and tanks.


B Ashton, where you've been? I mean, MiGs, military vehicles and tanks?!

What?!
Title: Re: M.O./ Sig.
Post by: Tahiri on March 09, 2012, 06:01:12 PM

Serial offenders modify and perfect their MO as they become more adept at what they do. The improvement or slight adjustment to an offender's MO is something for investigators to bear in mind in analyzing a criminal pattern over time and formulating a behavioral profile. This is especially true in the first stages of profiling when the investigator begins his or her profile from the paradigm of the Organized/Disorganized continuum.


L Liberty, how about copy-cat crimes - offenders that copy the MO/signature of other offenders reported in the media or described in fiction?


What exactly is the "signature" thing you mention, pick?


Looks like the signature has to do with what the offender does to satisfy his psychological needs in committing the crime (acts committed that are not necessary to complete the offense, characteristic to the specific offender) - that kind of explains the "why" also, as opposed to only "how" the crime was committed. But in real world, terms like these are taken with a grain of slat, truth-be-told. 
Title: Re: LSAT Scores
Post by: Romina on March 10, 2012, 04:36:19 PM

Listen - we know they use this IQ thing based on the Bell Curve and the like - but we all also know it's not that law schools, for example, really believe that LSAT is such a reliable entrance criteria they use (not the only they use, btw) - they just use it!

And please don't gimme that * & ^ % -

"If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it must be a duck."


My apologies for inserting this post on this thread, but these are the conditions we've to get used to,

Me too, would not be so concerned about the IQ thing, I mean, there are so many areas in which you can showcase yourself, should you have been accepted by the low school with not-so-good LSAT sore .
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: garçon on March 11, 2012, 07:58:06 PM

Wow, blinker on, you've come a long way baby - take a look here with this other * & ^ % that I am surprised they still use it!



Take for instance, the Rorschach test. Its inkblots are purportedly ambiguous, structureless entities which are to be given a clear structure by the interpreter. Like all projective tests, the Rorschach presents viewers with ambiguous images and asks them to interpret the images, thereby eliciting their thoughts, fears, motives, and fantasies. The 10 symmetrical inkblots used in the test (5 contain color, 5 are black and gray) are always the same, given in a specific order, and are supposed to be kept secret from the public to ensure "spontaneous" answers that give clues to people's personalities – and personality disorders. The Rorschach originally came under fire in the 1950s and '60s because it lacked standardized procedures for its administration and scoring.

[...] Projective tests like the Rorschach, the TAT (Thematic Apperception Test), which features cards with drawings of ambiguous situations, mostly featuring people, and the Draw-A-Person (clients are asked to draw a person of the same sex and the opposite sex) can take hours to administer and score, and rely heavily on examiner interpretation and, in some part, intuition. [...] Perhaps the Rorschach test can, as claimed, provide an "X-ray of the mind." But, asks Lilienfeld, whose mind: that of the client or the examiner?

(http://www.avatarhosting.net/pics/6321/inkblot_hed.gif)


TITCR!

You hit the nail on the @ # ! * i n g head, charisma!

;)


That's exactly the problem: the ambiguity of the inkblot, the fact that the same picture can be interpreted both ways, so to speak, "positively," and "negatively" - with these latter terms being relative, because what's considered "positive/relatively positive" for case (interpreter) #1, based on his/her own intuition/experience, may be the "negative/relative negative" of case (interpreter) #2, again, based on her/his intuition/experience :)

Of course, it would be nice if one would get the opinions of more than one interpreter, get like 2, or even more, in order to come to a better conclusion (something which in practice does not really happen, but we are talking what it would be happen in a perfect world, so to speak, again :)


For the sake of truth, the Rorschach inkblots are so ugly that there's no way one can come up with some flowery description of them. No wonder why it tends to over-pathologize. Standardizing the "test" won't help, for obvious reasons.

As getting the opinions of 2+ interpreters, wouldn't also.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Merci on March 12, 2012, 02:00:26 PM

Serial offenders modify and perfect their MO as they become more adept at what they do. The improvement or slight adjustment to an offender's MO is something for investigators to bear in mind in analyzing a criminal pattern over time and formulating a behavioral profile. This is especially true in the first stages of profiling when the investigator begins his or her profile from the paradigm of the Organized/Disorganized continuum.


L Liberty, how about copy-cat crimes - offenders that copy the MO/signature of other offenders reported in the media or described in fiction?


What exactly is the "signature" thing you mention, pick?


Looks like the signature has to do with what the offender does to satisfy his psychological needs in committing the crime (acts committed that are not necessary to complete the offense, characteristic to the specific offender) - that kind of explains the "why" also, as opposed to only "how" the crime was committed. But in real world, terms like these are taken with a grain of slat, truth-be-told.


Tahiri - I have a feeling that that's not exactly the kind of thing that Dhorothea is asking "pick" about!
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: l i n o l e u m on March 13, 2012, 03:15:41 PM
Quote
Quote

As to pyramid schemes:

Many pyramids are more sophisticated than the simple model. These recognize that recruiting a large number of others into a scheme can be difficult so a seemingly simpler model is used. In this model each person must recruit two others, but the ease of achieving this is offset because the depth required to recoup any money also increases. The scheme requires a person to recruit two others, who must each recruit two others, who must each recruit two others.

(http://img368.imageshack.us/img368/9586/8ballik0.jpg)

The "8-ball" model contains a total of 15 members. Note that unlike in the picture, the triangular setup in the cue game of eight-ball corresponds to an arithmetic progression 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 = 15. The pyramid scheme in the picture in contrast is a geometric progression 1 + 2 + 4 + 8 = 15.

Prior instances of this scam have been called the "Airplane Game" and the four tiers labelled as "captain", "co-pilot", "crew", and "passenger" to denote a person's level. Such schemes may try to downplay their pyramid nature by referring to themselves as "gifting circles" with money being "gifted". Popular scams such as the "Women Empowering Women" do exactly this. Joiners may even be told that "gifting" is a way to skirt around tax laws.

Whichever euphemism is used, there are 15 total people in four tiers (1 + 2 + 4 + 8 ) in the scheme - the person at the top of this tree is the "captain", the two below are "co-pilots", the four below are "crew" and the bottom eight joiners are the "passengers". The eight passengers must each pay (or "gift") a sum (e.g. $1000) to join the scheme. This sum (e.g. $8000) goes to the captain who leaves, with everyone remaining moving up one tier. There are now two new captains so the group splits in two with each group requiring eight new passengers. A person who joins the scheme as a passenger will not see a return until they exit the scheme as a captain. This requires that 14 others have been persuaded to join underneath them. Therefore, the bottom 3 tiers of the pyramid always lose their money when the scheme finally collapses.


Consider a pyramid consisting of tiers with 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, and 64 members.

(http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/7822/330pxpyramid8ballfullsvpx9.png)

No matter how large the model becomes before collapse, approximately 88% of all people will lose.

If the scheme collapses at this point, only those in the 1, 2, 4, and 8 got out with a return. The remainder in the 16, 32, and 64 tier lose everything. 112 out of the total 127 members or 88% lost all of their money. During a wave of pyramid activity, a surge frequently develops once a significant fraction of people know someone personally who exited with a $8000 payout for example. This spurs others to seek to get in on one of the many pyramids before the wave collapses. The figures also hide the fact that the confidence trickster would make the lion's share of the money. They would do this by filling in the first 3 tiers (with 1, 2, and 4 people) with phoney names, ensuring they get the first 7 payouts, at 8 times the buy-in sum, without paying a single penny themselves. So if the buy-in were $1000, they would receive $56,000, paid for by the first 56 investors. They would continue to buy in underneath the real investors, and promote and prolong the scheme for as long as possible in order to allow them to skim even more from it before the collapse.

Other cons may also be effective. For example, rather than using fake names, a group of 7 people may agree to form the top 3 layers of a pyramid without investing any money. They then work to recruit 8 paying passengers, and pretend to follow the pyramid payout rules, but in reality split any money received. Ironically, though they are being conned, the 8 paying passengers are not really getting anything less for their money than if they were buying into a 'legitimate' pyramid which had split off from a parent pyramid. They truly are now in a valid pyramid, and have the same opportunity to earn a windfall if they can successfully recruit enough new members and reach captain. This highlights the fact that by 'buying' in to a pyramid, passengers are not really obtaining anything of value they couldn't create themselves other than a vague sense of "legitimacy" or history of the pyramid, which may make it marginally easier to sell passenger seats below them.


Pyramidal schemes are cult-like environments, with those on the top being those who do nothing but lie and win, and the further down you go the more suckers, who lose everything, you find ...

What I wanted to point out, though, is that the hierarchical structure that the current social order entails can well be likened to a pyramidal scheme.


Easier said than done, L Liberti, thou, as Will You Walk,  points out after that post - and as these other posts by Just Say No demonstrate:

Quote

In massive scams, such as pyramid schemes or Ponzi schemes that involved thousands, perhaps millions of people, believers tend to congregate, and start their own 'support groups', where they start to reinforce each-other's beliefs. With advent of electronic communication, meetings can be held virtually via web forums (i.e. electronic bulletin boards), communication clients such as Internet chat clients, blogs, websites, and so on.

When large groups congregate, some people will dominate through sheer force of personality, even online, and those became the leaders. The result is a "cult of personality." This may or may not be encouraged by the scheme itself, but it certainly will not be discouraged.

Following is a list of signs of a cult:

- Thinking in black and white terms
- Using a new language/cultic jargon (coded language)
- Saying goodbye to all old friends and only seeing people affiliated with, or not critical of the cult
- Creating distance from family, especially during holidays and family events
- Euphoric, yet simultaneously tired and worn
- Humorless
- A change in diet and sleep patterns
- Low on money
- A dismissal of their life prior to involvement with the group as "all bad"
- A change in goals, priorities, and life plan
- Return to child-like behavior
- Dogmatic adherence to new beliefs/ideas, with the inability, or lack of interest to logically assess these new beliefs
- Secrecy

Scheme believers exhibit many of the signs listed above. Scam victims (i.e. scheme believers) are known to abandon friends and family, esp. those who are critical of the scam. They don't want to question the beliefs of the scam:, which is simply, "X is great, X will pay me. (Death to all opponents of X) " They sometimes even give themselves a new group name to increase their group identity (encouraged by the scam).

Title: Re: Dissonance & Jim Jones Case
Post by: l i n o l e u m on March 13, 2012, 03:20:38 PM

Will you walk, the CD Theory is all too complex to fully explain it here - I'd focus instead on the practical applications of the Dissonance Theory. That's because one of the reasons it has inspired much research is its ability to explain phenomena not readily explainable by common sense. For instance, dissonance theory has been used as a way to understand events that totally confound our imagination - like the enormous power certain cult leaders like Jim Jones, David Koresh, and Marshall Herff Applewhite have had over the hearts and minds of their followers.

Take for instance Jim Jones. It goes without saying that the massacre at Jonestown was tragic in the extreme. It is beyond comprehension that a single person could make hundreds of people kill themselves and their own children.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/02-jones-jim_ji.jpg)
"Jim" Jones was the founder and leader of the "Peoples Temple," best known for the Nov 18, 1978 mass suicide of 909 Temple members in Jonestown, Guyana, along with the killings of 5 other people at a nearby airstrip. Over 200 children were murdered at Jonestown, almost all of whom were forcefully made to ingest cyanide by the elite Temple members. Jones was born in Indiana and started the Temple in that state in the 1950s. Jones and the Temple later moved to California, and both gained notoriety with the move of the Temple's headquarters to San Francisco in the mid-1970s. The incident in Guyana ranks among the largest mass suicides in history, and was the single greatest loss of American civilian life in a non-natural disaster until the events of Sep 11, 2001.

Now you may have heard about the all-too-familiar technique of the foot-in-the-door. Escalation is perpetuating. Once a small commitment is made, it sets the stage for ever-increasing commitments. The behavior needs to be justified, so attitudes are changed; this change in attitudes influences future decisions and behavior. Suppose you would like to enlist someone's aid in a massive undertaking, but you know the job you have in mind for the person is so difficult, and will require so much time and effort, that the person will surely decline. What do you do? You may get the person involved in much smaller aspects of the job, ones so easy that s/he wouldn't dream of turning down. Such serves to commit the individual to the "cause." Once people are thus committed, the likelihood of their complying with the larger request increases.

Jim Jones extracted great trust from his followers one step at a time. There was a chain of ever-increasing commitments on the part of his followers. Once a small commitment is made, the stage is set for ever-increasing commitments. It's easy to understand how a charismatic leader like Jones might extract money from his church's members. Once they have committed themselves to donating a small amount in response to his message of peace and universal brotherhood, he's able to request and receive a great deal more. Next, he induces people to sell their homes and turn over the money to the church. Soon, at his request, several of his followers pull up stakes, leaving their families and friends, to start life anew in the strange and difficult environment of Guyana. There, not only do they work hard (thus increasing their commitment), but they also are cut off from potential dissenting opinion, inasmuch as they are surrounded by true believers.

Jones takes sexual liberties with several married women among his followers, who acquiesce, but reluctantly; Jones claims to be the father of their children. He had sexual relations with his men followers as well, and made them believe they were all homosexuals, while he was the only heterosexual. Finally, as a prelude to the climactic event, Jones induces his followers to perform a series of mock ritual suicides as a test of their loyalty and obedience. Thus, in a step-by-step fashion, the commitment to Jones increases. Each step in itself is not a huge, ludicrous leap from the one preceding it.

Title: Re: "Groupthink"
Post by: l i n o l e u m on March 13, 2012, 03:27:43 PM
Here it is another one, before it's too late..

Quote

In his memoirs, Albert Speer, one of Adolf Hitler's top advisers, describes the circle around Hitler as one of total conformity - deviation was not permitted. In such an atmosphere, even the most barbarous activities seemed reasonable because the absence of dissent, which conveyed the illusion of unanimity, prevented any individual from entertaining the possibility that other options might exist. In normal circumstances people who turn their backs on reality are soon set straight by the mockery and criticism of those around them. In the Third Reich there were not such correctives. On the contrary, every self-deception was multiplied as in a hall of distorting mirrors, becoming a repeatedly confirmed picture of a fantastical dream world which no longer bore any relationship to the grim outside world. In these mirrors you could see nothing but your own face reproduced many times ever.

A more familiar, but perhaps less dramatic, example concerns some of the men involved with Richard Nixon and his "palace guard" in the Watergate cover-up. Here, men in high government office - many of whom attorneys - perjured themselves, destroyed evidence, and offered bribes without an apparent second thought. This is due, at least in part, to the closed circle of single-mindedness that surrounded the president in the early 1970s. This single-mindedness made deviation virtually unthinkable until after the circle had been broken. Several people afterwards, such as Jeb Stuart Magruder, Richard Kleindienst, Patrick Grey seemed to view their illegal behavior with astonishment, as if it were performed during a bad dream.

John Dean put it this way: When you picked up the newspaper in the morning and read the new cover story that had replaced yesterday's cover story, you began to believe that today's news was the truth. This process created an atmosphere of unreality in the White House that prevailed to the very end. If you said it often enough, it would become true. When the press learned of the wiretaps on newsmen and White House staffers, for example, and flat denials failed, it was claimed that this was a national security matter. I'm sure many people believed that the taps were for national security; they weren't. That was concocted as a justification after the fact. But when they said it, you understand, they really believed it.

On January 28, 1986, the space shuttle Challenger exploded seconds after launching. Seven astronauts, including a civilian schoolteacher, perished in a fireball of smoke and flames. The decision had been made to go ahead with the launch despite a near disaster on an earlier Challenger flight and despite strenuous objections and warnings from knowledgeable engineers about the defective O-rings at the joints of the booster rockets. Were key NASA administrators ignorant of the danger or cavalier about the lives of the astronauts? I doubt it.

NASA had already conducted 2-dozen successful launches with essentially the same equipment. With their confidence boosted by previous successes, administrators were oriented toward a "go" decision. Second, NASA officials, like the general public, were caught up in the enthusiasm surrounding the launching of the first civilian (schoolteacher Christa McAuliffe) into space. Further, there were additional, practical reasons for NASA people to be victimized by their own wishful thinking: given NASA's need to secure congressional funding by displaying its efficiency and productivity, with the intense public interest in the "teacher in space" program and its wish to demonstrate its technological capabilities, lift-off was a more desirable decision than delay. Any mention of possible system failure would have suggested a need to spend more money, a conclusion NASA found distasteful in light of its commitment to cost-effectiveness and economy.

Unlike NASA administrators, engineers at Morton Thiokol (the company that manufactured the solid rocket boosters) were not concerned about the political, economic, and public relations implications of a decision on whether or not to launch. All they cared about was whether or not the damn thing would work - and given the subfreezing temperatures at the launch site, they objected strenuously to the launch. But the top execs at Morton were not so fortunate. For them, more was at stake than a successful launch. They were in great conflict. On the one hand, as engineers, they were sensitive to the opinions of their fellow engineers. On the other hand, as execs, they were dependent on NASA for a contract worth approximately $400 million per year. Thus, in part, they tended to identify with the same concerns that NASA administrators did. Robert Lund, Thiokol's vice president for engineering, at first opposed the launch but changed his position after he was advised to "take off his engineering hat and put on one representing management." How did Morton execs such as Lund deal with this conflict? Before their last conference with NASA administrators, they polled Thiokol employees but not the engineers - only other management personnel, who voted to "go" with the launch. Thus, in a conference between NASA officials and Thiokol execs the night before the fateful launch, participants reinforced one another's commitment to proceed.

Let's take stock. What do Hitler's inner circle, Nixon's "palace guard," and NASA administrators have in common, aside from the fact that they made tragic decisions? They were relatively cohesive groups isolated from dissenting points of view. When such groups are called upon to make decisions, they often fall prey to what soc psychologist Irving Janis calls groupthink. Groupthink is the mode of thinking that persons engage in when concurrence seeking becomes so dominant in a cohesive ingroup that it tends to override realistic appraisal of alternative courses of action. Such groups typically perceive themselves as invulnerable - they're blinded by optimism. The latter is perpetuated when dissent is discouraged. In the face of conformity pressures, individual group members come to doubt their own reservations and refrain from voicing dissenting opinions. Consensus seeking is so important that certain members of the group sometimes become mindguards - people who censor troublesome incoming information, as did the execs at Morton.

Title: Re: FIRST AMENDMENT - "OUTING" - DEFAMATION
Post by: Wolf-the-Painter on March 19, 2012, 03:09:41 PM

[...]

So, there you have it - the degrees of the closet - or "outness" - if you like. It is controversial whether outing a gay person is beneficial to the society and/or that person himself. Personally I think it does not make sense to out plain folk people, while it does to out public figures/people in authority.

Usually, the outed gay individual would go after a journalist and his newspaper who outed him. But even such lawsuits have proved unsuccessful in the long run. Here it is the Cruise's case with South Park:


The relevant "South Park" episode -- entitled "Trapped in the Closet" -- self-consciously skirts the outermost edges of the First Amendment's protection for parody. A court would probably deem it constitutionally protected, but only barely. Defamation requires a "statement of fact" -- and for this reason, most parody, because of its fictional nature, falls outside defamation law by definition.

But this is the rare parody that, fairly read, does make a statement of fact. In the episode, the animated version of Cruise literally goes into a closet, and won't come out. Other characters beg him to "come out of the closet," including the animated version of his ex-wife, Nicole Kidman. The Kidman character promises Cruise that if he comes out of the closet, neither she nor "Katie" will judge him. But the Cruise character claims he isn't "in the closet," even though he plainly is. No one could miss that the episode's creators are taking a stance and making a statement -- that the real Cruise is gay and hiding it.

The use of the euphemism "in the closet" -- used to refer to someone who is homosexual but who has not admitted his or her homosexuality to friends, family, or the public -- is transparent. Interestingly, the episode itself indicates that its creators know well that they may be defaming Cruise, and they know of his litigious history. The joke disclaimer preceding the episode announces that "All characters and events on this show -- even those based on real persons -- are entirely fictional."

At the end of the episode, the Cruise character threatens to bring a suit (not on the gay issue, but in defense of Scientology) "in England" -- which lacks a formal equivalent of the First Amendment. And all the credits at the end use the pseudonyms "John Smith" and "Jane Smith." Since the episode does indeed make a "statement of fact," the parody exception to defamation law won't save "South Park." Thus, the creators' only weapon against a possible suit by Cruise is a First Amendment defense. Fortunately for them, the Supreme Court has interpreted the defense very broadly.

[...] It's one thing to co-opt part of a song, or use a trademark, in a parody: Without using part of the original, the parody won't work at all; no one will know what its target is. But it's another thing to embed what would otherwise be a defamatory statement in a work of fiction: This is defamation in satire's clothing, and it's only in order to protect true satire that that the Constitution has been held to also protect this lesser creature. Generally, courts don't want to get into the business of picking out nuggets of fact from an otherwise fictional account. The upshot, though -- and courts know this, and accept this cost in the service of free speech -- is that parody and satire inevitably may become a refuge for rogues who seek to defame without liability. That seems to me to be just what's happening with respect to the "South Park" episode.


I'm not sure I understand the "statement of fact" thing stressed upon by the lawyer here - SP maintains that the whole thing is a parody, characters are all fictional - everything seems OK, with the FA protection in mind.

I mean, you have tabloids (papers) claiming outright that Cruise is gay - I just don't get the over analyzing kind of thing that the Yale lawyer is doing in the case of SP.

(http://s18.postimage.org/o9ujjmdqv/enquirer_tomssecretlife_798x1024.jpg)

http://www.celebitchy.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/enquirer_tomssecretlife-798x1024.jpg


I am not a law student, but it looks like, ent, that "defamation" is a catch-all term for any statement that hurts someone's reputation. Written defamation is called "libel," and spoken defamation is called "slander." A person who has been defamed can sue the person who did the defaming.

The law of defamation varies from state to state, but there are some generally accepted rules. If you believe you are have been "defamed," to prove it you usually have to show there's been a statement that is all of the following:

*Published - the "statement" must be "published," which means, spoken, written, pictured, or even gestured. (Thus libel > slander).

*Published means that a 3rd party heard/saw the statement -- that is, someone other than the person who made the statement or the person the statement was about. "Published" doesn't necessarily mean that the statement was printed in a book -- it just needs to have been made public through TV, radio, speeches, gossip, or even loud conversation. (Of course, it could also have been written in magazines, books, newspapers, leaflets, or on picket signs).

*False - The defamatory statement must be false -- otherwise it's not considered damaging. Even terribly mean/disparaging things are not defamatory if the shoe fits. Most opinions (it must, thus, be a "statement of fact") don't count as defamation because they can't be proved to be objectively false.

*Injurious. Since the whole point of defamation law is to take care of injuries to reputation, those suing for defamation must show how their reputations were hurt by the false statement -- for example, the person lost work; was shunned by neighbors, friends, or family members; or was harassed by the press (like the case is with gay outing).
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Wolf-the-Painter on March 19, 2012, 04:06:10 PM
"Outing" of closeted gays and lesbians is not a new phenomenon. It occurred during the McCarthy era and before, often with an intent to harm the closeted homosexual with the threat of public disclosure of homosexuality.

To extend a bit here and offer a hypo for you all: A married man is placed under surveillance by the FBI. During the 4+ years they're following him they found out that he engaged in 7 separate occasions in homosexual sex with other men in a couple of open public areas that gay men frequent. Three out of the seven instances were oral sex, two of them intercourse (being the active partner), and one time he just kissed the other guy and cuddled him a little bit.

After a certain time period, the FBI decides to make the target aware of being under their surveillance (active surveillance), and also deepens its infiltration, such that his wife too is part of the game. The man is clearly in the situation of being defamed, given the fact that he's not a public figure, he doesn't consider him to be "homosexual," (truth-be-told, a lot of straight men may have 1-2 gay encounters a year with other men), and the First Amendment defense doesn't even apply in this case.

Because people tend to believe what the government say, he's clearly injured, with his wife divorcing him after a while (albeit, she never confronted him directly about the matter, not being allowed to even acknowledge to him she was approached by the agency). I think this would be a curious hypo, in that although statements were never printed or even publicly acknowledged, just like in the case of Cruise's "South Park," they're just as defamatory and injurious. Feel free to share. Please do.
Title: Re: Psychopath attorneys
Post by: Wolf-the-Painter on March 20, 2012, 01:45:53 PM

[...]

There are, however, other ways that similar types of defenses against the homosexual self-label can be articulated. These males to be "homophobic, gay-bashing hoodlums who pick up or are picked up by a gay male, have sex with him, and they exorcise their own homosexual guilt by assaulting and maybe killing him. The "exorcist syndrome" which is a version of the "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" nature manifested by people like Cardinal Spellman and Roy Cohn. The phenomena is also similar to a "split personality" situation. One of the personalities is "the grand inquisitor," as McCarthy and Cohn had become in a spectacular way, and it needs to punish the homosexual part of their 'personality'. This internal war is also projected outward causing these socially created monsters to harm other gay males by ruining their careers or, as other males will do, punishing them may include physical assaults and even murder.

[...]

Here's another parallel from poster maj:

Quote


[...] The "grandiosity gap" - the painful and narcissistically injurious gap between their grandiose fantasies and their dreary and humiliating reality - becomes emotionally insupportable. They decompensate and act out. [...] Unbeknownst to them, they seek self punishment. They are at heart suicidal. [...] This is called "projective identification". They attribute evil and corruption to their enemies and foes. These forms of paranoia are called projection and splitting. These are all primitive, infantile, and often persecutory, defence mechanisms.

When coupled with narcissism - the inability to empathize, the exploitativeness, the sense of entitlement, the rages, the dehumanization and devaluation of others - this mindset yields abysmal contempt for the narcissist's victims. The overriding emotion of terrorists and serial killers, the amalgam and culmination of their tortured psyche - is deep seated disdain for everything human, the flip side of envy. It is cognitive dissonance gone amok. [...] To justify this apparent contradiction, the mass murderer casts himself as an altruistic savior of a group of people "endangered" by his foes. [...]

[...] Their cosmic significance is daily sustained by newspaper headlines, ever increasing bounties, admiring copycats, successful acts of blackmail, the strength and size of their opponents, and the devastation of human life and property. Appeasement works only to aggravate their drives and strengthen their appetites by emboldening them and by raising the threshold of excitation and "narcissistic supply". Terrorists and killers are addicted to this drug of being acknowledged and reflected. They derive their sense of existence, parasitically, from the reactions of their (often captive) audience.

Erich Fromm suggested that both Hitler and Stalin were narcissistic mass murderers. Hitler and Nazism are often portrayed as an apocalyptic and seismic break with European history. Yet the truth is that they were the culmination and reification of European history in the 19th century. Europe's annals of colonialism have prepared it for the range of phenomena associated with the Nazi regime - from industrial murder to racial theories, from slave labor to the forcible annexation of territory. [...] Moreover, Nazi Germany innovated by applying prevailing racial theories (usually reserved to non-whites) to the white race itself. It started with the Jews - a non-controversial proposition - but then expanded them to include "east European" whites, such as the Poles and the Russians. Germany was not alone in its malignant nationalism. [...] Nazism - and Fascism - were world ideologies, adopted enthusiastically in places as diverse as Iraq, Egypt, Norway, Latin America, and Britain. At the end of the 1930's, liberal capitalism, communism, and fascism (and its mutations) were locked in mortal battle of ideologies. [...]

[...]

What was the role of the Jews in all this? [...] The Jews constituted a perfect, easily identifiable, reification of all that was "wrong" with Europe. They were an old nation, they were eerily disembodied (without a territory), they were cosmopolitan, they were part of the establishment, they were "decadent", they were hated on religious and socio-economic grounds, they were different, they were narcissistic (felt and acted as morally superior), they were everywhere, they were defenseless, they were credulous, they were adaptable (and thus could be co-opted to collaborate in their own destruction). They were the perfect hated father figure and parricide was in fashion.

[...]




Arguments for the strategic "outing" of public figures who are homosexual often claim that by revealing to the heterosexual community the significant contributions of homosexuals, homosexuality will become more acceptable to dominant society. As we recognize that not only actors, singers, and movie directors are "queer," but also CEOs, bankers and legislators, we will become more comfortable with homosexuality. But threatening to "out" the-average-Joe does nothing more than destroy his life and does not serve the community. Not to mention, that even by law, private individuals have a greater zone of privacy than do public figures.