This introduction to "alien reaction machines" in human
form describes individuals with Anti-Social Personality
Disorder (APD), Sociopaths, and Psychopaths.
(In referring to these entities below, I use "that"
instead of "who" to reinforce the distinction between
machine-like reactions and normal human behavior.)
There is considerable overlap of symptoms as medical
researchers have refined the classifications. One of the
links below provides detailed distinctions among these
definitions. It also includes an extensive bibliography.
In this essay, next, however, the older, generic term
"psychopath" is used.
A psychopath is a person who appears normal on the
surface, until he/she performs some outrageous criminal
act. At that point it has been customary to label the
behavior as temporary "insanity", but that is a legal
term, not a medical one. The prison psychiatric hospital
environment greatly reduces the options for the new
patient to make the kind of independent decisions that
caused the original trouble in open society. In this
controlled environment he/she appears normal, shows no
overt signs of psychosis, passes all probing tests with
flying colors, and is discharged as "cured". On the
street again, more crimes are committed, and the cycle
repeats. Thus, these individuals fall through the cracks
between law and medicine.
Most people, including judges and juries, are still unable
to make the distinction that not all prison inmates are
psychopaths and not all antisocial individuals are
convicted criminals. The links below can be confusing
unless one is aware that the label "psychopathic
personality" was the original descriptive term for today's
aggressive "antisocial personality". The new euphemism is
an obfuscation of an unpleasant truth about people we are
forced to deal with on a daily basis. It is difficult for
all of us, especially when associating with disruptive
school children, whose unearned "self esteem" must be
protected at all costs. In the literature one can expect
to see both the new and the old terms, without much
distinction between them.
Western industrial civilization has developed a complex
set of rules of behavior for its citizens. These rules
have evolved from the need for cooperative organization in
order to produce the goods and services actually needed by
society for minimum survival as a group, and also to
produce the intangible benefits that make that survival
tolerable for the individual. It makes most sense to
reserve the greatest rewards to those individuals who
produce the most goods and services of the highest
quality. Most people understand they need specialized
training for any role above some minimum level, and they
must compete for that training, and later compete on the
job itself. They understand that the need for group
survival dictates the rules of the game, and they must not
disrupt the group process by uncooperative, dishonest,
unethical, or violent behavior, or flagrant violation of
the rules.
Psychopaths believe they are "entitled" to the lifestyle
benefits of Western Civilization that most people only
hope for as a potential reward for outstanding job
performance, organizational loyalty, and smooth
cooperation with other members of a team. Psychopaths
can't or won't work at the high performance level that
might logically provide upscale benefits. At a lower
level where they might be more qualified, they feel that
any menial, boring, dirty, or disgusting WORK is
"beneath" them. Thus, whether at a high level or low
level, any meaningful, honest "work" is a dirty word to a
psychopath.
With extraordinary assistance from motivated parents, some
more intelligent, but still antisocial people can and do
gravitate to higher-paid management, politics, or the
professions, where power and prestige can be significant
ego enhancers. However, they are always "close to the
edge" emotionally, and are likely to abuse sex, drugs, and
alcohol. Also, they may tend to "seek out" excuses to
deliberately over-indulge, in order to remove temporarily
the stifling "mask of sanity" that never quite fits.
Then, when "under the influence" they are more likely to
exhibit aggressive, violent, and/or bizarre behavior in
inappropriate public places. This odd behavior is the key
classic sign of acute dysfunction. Some reference books
provide fascinating case histories describing typical
incidents.
When one realizes that the antisocial syndrome is
pervasive in today's society, what protection is available
to the average adult citizen? How can one know the alien
body snatcher before any actual overt criminal act? There
are two simple test tools available to any perceptive,
educated adult: The tools are contrived casual
conversation and unobtrusive observation. With these
tools one can make a simple first screening test to
possibly rule out psychopathic personality in public
officials or others:
The psychopath is a dangerously clever "alien reaction
machine" that has practiced giving all the correct
answers. However, much of that verbal practice will have
taken place in institutions or in dysfunctional families
in lower-class neighborhoods. When those same answers are
given in upscale surroundings, they come out as contrived
falsehoods.
Another clue is that the alien machine will not take
responsibility, but will tend to "blame others" for
misfortunes with drugs, sexual partners, bosses, co-
workers, authorities, or whatever. Also, the full-blown
psychopath is NEVER altruistic or ethical (except by
accident), but may be shrewd enough to pretend altruism as
sham behavior (to attract votes). By accepting a
psychopath's statements at face value, without cross-
checking public records or other sources, a careless or
inattentive interviewer can fail to pick up on the
frequent lies. For example, to trip up corrupt
politicians or self-described "experts", sometimes it is
only necessary to compare two different answers to the
same or similar questions repeated on two or more
different occasions, without involving external sources at
all. Any pattern of lies will stand out as outside the
norm of ethical conduct. By itself, this discrepancy is
insufficient to classify the individual as antisocial, but
it is an indication that other tests should be made.
* * * * *
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Cleckley, Hervey (1903-1984): The Mask of Sanity, Fifth
Edition, 1988. Previous editions copyrighted 1941, 1950,
1955, 1964, 1976 by The C. V. Mosby Co. Over 300
additional references are cited in the Bibliography. (This
is the classic reference book. It is easy to read and has
many detailed case histories.)
