3 ms·

I don't see the point in imagining a world without psychopaths. It'd be lovely, but no amount of societal structure will ever remove them, we can only try to re

I don't see the point in imagining a world without psychopaths. It'd be lovely, but no amount of societal structure will ever remove them, we can only try to reach them whenever possible and lessen their influence on others.

andreasvc 14y ago
That's a pretty cynical world view. I think a lot of bad stuff happens for reasons that could be taken away given better social structures, e.g., people who are abusive because they were abused themselves, desperation because of poverty, etc. There are probably psychopaths which simply have the genetic disposition for that, but violence perpetrated for ideological reasons is definitely something that society could address one way or another.
- sk5t 14y ago
  Likely we can reduce the incidence of destructive acts somewhat, but it seems improbable to eliminate them entirely... with billions upon billions of humans roaming the planet, a few minds are bound to go off the rails.
icebraining 14y ago
It should be noted that multiple studies indicated that terrorists don't have a bigger share of psychopaths than the general population. Average people can convince themselves and/or be convinced to maim and kill if they believe their cause is just. This does not in any way mean we should excuse them, any more than I would let a rabid dog attack me just because I recognize it can't be expected to follow ethical behavior.
- Florin_Andrei 14y ago
  I remember reading somewhere that a surprisingly large number of terrorists / bombers / what have you, are guys in their 20s or 30s with an engineering background, otherwise pretty normal and unremarkable.
  - illuminate 14y ago
    Certainly among the 9/11 hijackers, but there appears to be a great deal of asymmetry with foreign terrorists. Domestic terrorists don't ~appear~ to find the same level of stability, though I haven't read any specific papers that investigated their family lives, careers, etc.
- darkarmani 14y ago
  That's a scarier prospect than the opposite.
vacri 14y ago
It'd be lovely, but no amount of societal structure will ever remove them Anti-murder laws don't remove murder, but they do massively lessen it. I'm always perplexed by the idea that unless something is 100% effective, it somehow 'hasn't worked'.
- illuminate 14y ago
  It wasn't a particularly long post, but I directly stated that we need to do we can to help them at the same time that I stated that they're not going away.
  - vacri 14y ago
    My point is more that it's a continuum rather than a boolean. More societal structures to help mentally ill people means less mentally ill people. A lot of mental illness can 'go away' if the right methods are in place, and yes, it won't ever be 100% effective. I don't have a problem with what you're saying, just that the particular phrase you used is a viewpoint that always puzzles me due to its implied binary status.

andreasvc 14y ago

That's a pretty cynical world view. I think a lot of bad stuff happens for reasons that could be taken away given better social structures, e.g., people who are abusive because they were abused themselves, desperation because of poverty, etc. There are probably psychopaths which simply have the genetic disposition for that, but violence perpetrated for ideological reasons is definitely something that society could address one way or another.

sk5t 14y ago
Likely we can reduce the incidence of destructive acts somewhat, but it seems improbable to eliminate them entirely... with billions upon billions of humans roaming the planet, a few minds are bound to go off the rails.

icebraining 14y ago

It should be noted that multiple studies indicated that terrorists don't have a bigger share of psychopaths than the general population. Average people can convince themselves and/or be convinced to maim and kill if they believe their cause is just. This does not in any way mean we should excuse them, any more than I would let a rabid dog attack me just because I recognize it can't be expected to follow ethical behavior.

Florin_Andrei 14y ago
I remember reading somewhere that a surprisingly large number of terrorists / bombers / what have you, are guys in their 20s or 30s with an engineering background, otherwise pretty normal and unremarkable.
- illuminate 14y ago
  Certainly among the 9/11 hijackers, but there appears to be a great deal of asymmetry with foreign terrorists. Domestic terrorists don't ~appear~ to find the same level of stability, though I haven't read any specific papers that investigated their family lives, careers, etc.
darkarmani 14y ago
That's a scarier prospect than the opposite.

vacri 14y ago

It'd be lovely, but no amount of societal structure will ever remove them Anti-murder laws don't remove murder, but they do massively lessen it. I'm always perplexed by the idea that unless something is 100% effective, it somehow 'hasn't worked'.

illuminate 14y ago
It wasn't a particularly long post, but I directly stated that we need to do we can to help them at the same time that I stated that they're not going away.
- vacri 14y ago
  My point is more that it's a continuum rather than a boolean. More societal structures to help mentally ill people means less mentally ill people. A lot of mental illness can 'go away' if the right methods are in place, and yes, it won't ever be 100% effective. I don't have a problem with what you're saying, just that the particular phrase you used is a viewpoint that always puzzles me due to its implied binary status.