There's always the question of knowing right from wrong.
Anyone who commits a crime such as hurting a child, murder, etc. obviously has something wrong with them; i.e, they're 'crazy' - however you label it. It's just not 'normal'. By your definition we'd have to turn all the jails and prison into institutions. The only people left in prison would be thiefs, robbers and the like?
You can still be my friend, though.
I've never forgotten the eminent writer (have forgotten his name though, sorry) who several times expressed his vexation and concern about the fact we execute people like Bundy instead of studying them to learn all we can about what makes them tick as they do. The 'eye for eye' mentality (said this writer who's name I should have remembered) deprives us of knowledge which would ultimately benefit us
Most certainly, I don't have an answer, that's obvious. But I've had close association with someone very similar to KC (though not quite as extreme as KC) and -- as with all others who've suffered at the individual's hands -- it leaves scars which will remain for life. The only means of survival I've discovered is to sever all contact with the individual and to have it enforced by law. Nevertheless, I'm the first to admit that these sociopathic individuals can be and often are, entirely charming -- sufficient to charm the most astute and experienced potential and actual victims. Just as I'm sure KC can be and is extremely charming when it suits
Having experienced someone very similar to KC, I must admit that whilst not particularly intelligent as most of us would describe it, they do the best with what they have. And this is often
MORE than enough to run rings around the rest of us. Why is that ? Only answer I can give is that
most of us live by the rules, generally speaking. We agree about what is 'right and wrong' and we maintain those borders. We agree about what
should engender guilt and we obediently 'feel guilty' when we have failed to conform. This is how we maintain law and order, good and bad, right and wrong within our personal lives, our families, our communities and throughout life
The sociopath, however, regards us as fools for maintaining these boundaries. Give you an example: I once criticised and questioned the sociopath of my own experience, about her having affairs with several men whilst married to what most of us would consider a decent, faithful spouse. I said, unoriginally, ' You can't have your cake and eat it too ', to which she replied, ' Why ever not ? '. I had no answer other than to say, ' Because it's wrong. It's not fair to your husband '. She gave me a look which said, 'Don't waste my time. You're pathetic '. Point is, the sociopath saw NO reason to obey the rules of a society which she despised for its cowardliness and hypocrisy. She knew that many, many within our 'decent world' indulged in sexual fantasies which were 'unfaithful' and to which they would not admit if questioned and in fact would deny if confronted. Others dreamed and fantasised -- she acted openly instead. So -- who amongst us may cast the first stone ? Certainly, people generally respond with, ' Oh, but doing the deed in reality is far, far worse than merely fantasising about it. At least I was strong enough to resist acting on my fantasies ! '. However, science claims that 'thought' is energy, and that energy eventually becomes matter. So is the fantasy in fact, any more decent, honest and good than skipping the scientific process whereby our fantasies, on some level, eventually become the same as the act ? We don't know. We don't care to consider it, most of us, most of the time
' I'll KILL you if you don't tidy your room, do your homework, take a bath, eat your dinner' etc. How many mothers/fathers have screamed that when at the end of their tether ? Do they act on it - no. They do not actually kill their children and their children know they won't. Except some parents do. They feel little if any guilt. The programming which works to keep most of us on the right side of the law fails to impact on those we describe as 'sociopaths'. They see the world as a zoo, an insane asylum and they feel no compunction to live by the asylum's rules
The 'canny, astute businessman' who sells shoddy goods, potentially lethal foodstuffs and worthless insurance policies is often a luminary in the local men's clubs and council. He's rewarded and admired for being 'rich, successful'. Yet oftentimes he's a criminal who preys on the trusting and uninformed and steals from them as they thank him. We all know true stories about lawyers and police dept. heads who've framed someone else for a crime committed by a friend's son or brother. They get away with it and continue their lives while an innocent person spends decades in prison. The guilty go on holidays, hold birthday parties for their grandchildren and play golf together with scarcely a thought for the person whose life they've destroyed. And they spend their last years in comfort, attended by nurses and family. When they die, people vie to eulogise them, praise them. And the clergy commend their souls to heaven. But weren't those people undiscovered, unrenounced sociopaths who spat in the face of the values and beliefs of the rest of us ?
The hit and run driver who's never discovered - the person who's given fifty dollars too much change at the supermarket - the person who lies about a colleague and cost that colleague their job, their livlihood, their reputation, their family ... the father in law or employer or neighbour who masturbates to fantasies about raping someone or a child --- they're all around us, as are the goissips who cost a man or woman their marriage or children's respect ... they 'get away with it' and live out their lives. They do so because they rationalise and justify their deeds and thoughts. For them, it's a matter of degree. They decide their crime is not a big-one or isn't being acted-out in reality. Or they calculate they won't be discovered or exposed, so it's 'safe' to hurt another or benefit from another's loss or to fantasise about sleeping with their neighbour
Sociopaths, by comparison, commit 'big' crimes. They 'go too far' for the rest of us to allow. They DO act on their fantasies. Instead of restricting themselves to 'allowable' or 'common' offences such as gossip, backstabbing, genteel-theft, verbal bullying of their child, alienation of members of their family or community, taking credit for another's work or a bit of petty-theft at work. etc. ... the sociopaths go Cinemascope. They
actually kill - they totally destroy entire families and lives - and they don't bother to hide their enjoyment and laughter
So it's a matter of degree, isn't it ? Sociopaths could be described as suffering from lack of perspective -or from the inability to differentiate between fantasy and what we term 'reality'. Is it a clinical condition ? Should they be held to blame because society's conditioning failed to 'take' with them, in the same way vaccinations and prescribed medicines fail to 'work' on some ? Are we the hypocrites sociopaths believe us to be ? Are sociopaths actually more honest than the rest of us ? Are sociopaths simply subject to a more ancient brain ? Are they throwbacks to a time when people killed (including killing their own children) as a matter or course or at whim or as what was then considered 'necessity' ?
Many parents who're considered 'good parents' by society, resent their children for a variety of reasons. They don't actually kill their children, but they do cripple them quite often - psychologically, emotionally, intellectually, opportunity-wise. Many mothers are jealous of their daughters. Most fathers, at one time or another, feel jealous of their sons. Many in-laws deliberately cause trouble. Many friends poison their friends' relationships - from jealousy, spite or fear they'll be 'left out' if their close friend marries and moves away, whatever. ' He/she is not good enough for you, has been unfaithful to you, has flirted with me, has said things about you '. These comments, lies most often, are said every hour of every day, somewhere in the world. And it's accepted. It's all accepted in our society. It's not 'good', but it's allowed. It happens and we say, ' Whatevah, move on'
Sociopaths are larger than life. They act on their impulses. They take it that degree further. They don't fantasise about raping and killing -- they
do it. They don't just imagine what life would be like without the impediment of a child - they rid themselves of the child. They don't just consider blaming someone else - they make the accusation out loud. But, they're aware these behaviours and attitudes are not shared by the majority within society, so they take the time to cover their tracks if they can. Otherwise, society will punish them. And because sociopaths see no reason to quibble about the 'size' of lies generally (as most of us do) sociopaths paint with a broad brush. Lying is lying as far as they're concerned, so why limit themselves to 'little' lies when they would benefit more from a 'big' lie. Again, just a matter of degree
Aren't sociopaths what many of us would be if we hadn't been programmed to conform to our particular society's mores ? Our Western societies' mores aren't all societies' mores/rules of course. In Islamic societies, people are buried to their necks and stoned to death, for example. Or, their women are accused of being prostitutes if they're found with males not of their immediate families. In more primitive societies, infanticide is not a crime but the norm. And of course, many animals kill their own young. There are many other examples where those we describe as 'sociopaths' would fit right in -- Papua New Guinea or the Congo, for example
The argument can be extended to include what we loosely term 'the spiritual', also. Reincarnation. Many subscribe to the theory of past-lives. What if those we describe in our society as 'sociopaths' -- are actually reincarnated individuals from societies where killing and infanticide were the norm ? Possible ? If so, can we in all good conscience condemn them for containing within them remnants of behaviours which - in their past life/lives -- were considered acceptable ?
Who knows ? I don't. Nor am I suggesting I agree with all or any of the above. Just putting it out there ...
