> The point is that what he is describing is based on solid current knowledge about psychopathy. What? There is no "solid current knowledge about psychopathy."

> The point is that what he is describing is based on solid current knowledge about psychopathy. What? There is no "solid current knowledge about psychopathy." This is why the DSM is being abandoned, or have you not been keeping up with current events? > The behaviour he is describing is congruent with current best scientific knowledge on the topic. Well, that's certainly true. It's true because there's no science in this field. Prove this wrong -- point to a clear, testable psychological claim (a claim about the workings of the mind) that was falsified using empirical evidence, ever, anywhere. > His behaviour and brain scan, whether true or just imagined, is not evidence to support anything and he isn't implying it is. That would explain why he sincerely wondered whether he was a psychopath. You know, it's customary to read an article before offering learned views abut its content. >> If we accepted modern psychology's basic premise -- that there is a normal behavior toward which we should all aspire [...] > Just what on earth are you talking about? Shall I quote from the vast psychological literature that tells us how many of us are sick and need therapy, or will you educate yourself? Shall I tell you the story of Asperger Syndrome, now abandoned for cause, that submitted any number of bright youngsters to pointless therapy before being laughed off the stage of public opinion? Title: "Determining What Is Normal Behavior and What Is Not" Link: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/fighting-fear/201305/determining-what-is-normal-behavior-and-what-is-not http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/fighting-fear/201305/det... There are ten thousand more where that came from. > Please, stop the nonsense. You have two choices: learn this topic, or stop posting your ignorant views in this public forum.