3 ms·

I am equally unsure. But I believe we have a responsibility to try to help the weakest members of our society become better people, and if that means locking th

by throwway120385 4y ago

I am equally unsure. But I believe we have a responsibility to try to help the weakest members of our society become better people, and if that means locking them up for a while and trying to teach them a moral compass that's what we should try even if it's doomed to failure. It can't be any worse than what we're currently doing.

AlbertCory 4y ago
Psychopathic individuals mainly use therapy as post-graduate training in how to simulate human emotion. Just ask some shrinks. They don't learn a moral compass; they learn how to pretend they have one. Of course, not all inmates are psychopathic, but 15-25% manifest those traits, according to https://www.apa.org/monitor/2022/03/ce-corner-psychopathy https://www.apa.org/monitor/2022/03/ce-corner-psychopathy.
- strken 4y ago
  How meaningful is it to manifest psychopathic trait to a clinically significant degree? If you look at them, they include impulsivity, risk taking, and violence. Of course prisoners will be impulsive, take risks, and/or be violent! That's how a lot of them end up in prison! There is something of a jump from there to the pop science understanding of psychopathy. It's not clear that everyone who displays some of those traits is going to display all the others, that a pattern of risky violence means someone is automatically beyond help, that the stats on psychopaths aren't including lots of people with other underlying problems that fully explain their behaviour, or that anyone else who goes to a therapist is doing anything radically different from simulating normal human behaviour.
  - AlbertCory 4y ago
    > the pop science understanding of psychopathy the reference I gave is not pop science. Your debunking and pooh-pooh'ing is unpersuasive. This is a professional association publishing that, and they do have shrinks in prison. "About 1.2% of U.S. adult men and 0.3% to 0.7% of U.S. adult women are considered to have clinically significant levels of psychopathic traits. Those numbers rise exponentially in prison, where 15% to 25% of inmates show these characteristics (Burton, B., & Saleh, F. M., Psychiatric Times, Vol. 37, No. 10, 2020). "
    - strken 4y ago
      I'm not debunking anything, I'm asking how meaningful manifesting traits to a "clinically significant" level actually is. If I shoot my neighbour's dog in broad daylight then show no remorse it's probably manifesting psychopathic traits to a clinically significant degree, but it doesn't mean it would be totally worthless to send me to a psychiatrist. It may not even mean that I meet the threshold to be diagnosed as an actual psychopath, under whatever contorted DSM-V diagnosis it currently sits. Your reference has no bearing on the answer to that question and in fact notes that 30% of the population display some traits of psychopathy, which is the entire point here. If you squint hard enough, you can label 30% of the population as psychopaths; if you're also convinced it's useless to send them to therapy, you can use the label to deny them mental health care and stick them in prison. I'm worried that a broad and underspecified definition of psychopathy combines with an overstated inability to treat them, in a way that is morally bankrupt and tantamount to just giving up.
- throwway120385 4y ago
  I don't get it. Are you advocating throwing the baby out with the bath water? Just because the 15-25% exist doesn't mean we can't try to teach the 75% how to exist in society without breaking the rules. And it also doesn't preclude us from giving them something other than a swift kick in the ass. Kicking your ass seems to be the only thing the criminal justice system in the US does these days.
quacked 4y ago
"Two social workers walk past a man lying beaten and bloody on the ground, moaning for help. One turns to the other and says 'My God, whoever did this needs our help.'" The weakest in society are those who are taken advantage of by the morally bankrupt, not the morally bankrupt themselves. However, I agree that what we are currently doing is worse than almost every alternative.

AlbertCory 4y ago

Psychopathic individuals mainly use therapy as post-graduate training in how to simulate human emotion. Just ask some shrinks. They don't learn a moral compass; they learn how to pretend they have one. Of course, not all inmates are psychopathic, but 15-25% manifest those traits, according to https://www.apa.org/monitor/2022/03/ce-corner-psychopathy https://www.apa.org/monitor/2022/03/ce-corner-psychopathy.

strken 4y ago
How meaningful is it to manifest psychopathic trait to a clinically significant degree? If you look at them, they include impulsivity, risk taking, and violence. Of course prisoners will be impulsive, take risks, and/or be violent! That's how a lot of them end up in prison! There is something of a jump from there to the pop science understanding of psychopathy. It's not clear that everyone who displays some of those traits is going to display all the others, that a pattern of risky violence means someone is automatically beyond help, that the stats on psychopaths aren't including lots of people with other underlying problems that fully explain their behaviour, or that anyone else who goes to a therapist is doing anything radically different from simulating normal human behaviour.
- AlbertCory 4y ago
  > the pop science understanding of psychopathy the reference I gave is not pop science. Your debunking and pooh-pooh'ing is unpersuasive. This is a professional association publishing that, and they do have shrinks in prison. "About 1.2% of U.S. adult men and 0.3% to 0.7% of U.S. adult women are considered to have clinically significant levels of psychopathic traits. Those numbers rise exponentially in prison, where 15% to 25% of inmates show these characteristics (Burton, B., & Saleh, F. M., Psychiatric Times, Vol. 37, No. 10, 2020). "
  - strken 4y ago
    I'm not debunking anything, I'm asking how meaningful manifesting traits to a "clinically significant" level actually is. If I shoot my neighbour's dog in broad daylight then show no remorse it's probably manifesting psychopathic traits to a clinically significant degree, but it doesn't mean it would be totally worthless to send me to a psychiatrist. It may not even mean that I meet the threshold to be diagnosed as an actual psychopath, under whatever contorted DSM-V diagnosis it currently sits. Your reference has no bearing on the answer to that question and in fact notes that 30% of the population display some traits of psychopathy, which is the entire point here. If you squint hard enough, you can label 30% of the population as psychopaths; if you're also convinced it's useless to send them to therapy, you can use the label to deny them mental health care and stick them in prison. I'm worried that a broad and underspecified definition of psychopathy combines with an overstated inability to treat them, in a way that is morally bankrupt and tantamount to just giving up.
throwway120385 4y ago
I don't get it. Are you advocating throwing the baby out with the bath water? Just because the 15-25% exist doesn't mean we can't try to teach the 75% how to exist in society without breaking the rules. And it also doesn't preclude us from giving them something other than a swift kick in the ass. Kicking your ass seems to be the only thing the criminal justice system in the US does these days.

quacked 4y ago

"Two social workers walk past a man lying beaten and bloody on the ground, moaning for help. One turns to the other and says 'My God, whoever did this needs our help.'" The weakest in society are those who are taken advantage of by the morally bankrupt, not the morally bankrupt themselves. However, I agree that what we are currently doing is worse than almost every alternative.