As Jon Ronson says, “It’s much easier to fake madness than to fake normality”, but in order to fake ‘madness’ (a mental disorder where a person is unable to understand the present circumstances), shouldn’t one already possess psychopath traits? Truthfully, most of us have psychopathic traits and we go through our whole lives without being diagnosed. But if cause no real harm to our society, should it really matter whether we are diagnosed or not? Although, perhaps it is not as simple as that, because many psychopaths end up as leaders and/or important global actors (i.e., politicians), so technically they mould the rules and regulations formed in a society. So maybe it would make more sense to be slightly mad, living in a world full of madness.
The term psychopathy and understanding of the mental disorder evolved with the French psychiatrist, Phillipe Pinel, who labelled psychopathy as “manie sans delire” (insanity without delusions) in the late 18th century. However, it was not until 1891 where the actual term psychopathy was formed by the German doctor, J.L.A Koch, in his book Die psycopathischen Minderwertigkeiten (the psychopathic inferiorities). The word psychopath has ultimately been threaded with a lot of stigmatisation, as it was originally used to describe individuals who were “deceitful, manipulative and uncaring”. Eventually, this definition was used to describe ‘sociopaths’, encompassing the fact that these individuals harm society. However, there is no clinical difference between a sociopath and a psychopath, as these terms are both used in reference to individuals with ‘anti-personality disorder’ (ASPD), a broader mental health condition that is used to describe people who chronically act out and break rules (social norms or laws). Although often used interchangeably, psychopaths and sociopaths may differ slightly; for example, a psychopath lacks a conscience, whereas a sociopath typically has a weak conscience, meaning that they comprehend how certain actions they play out are wrong; but both mental disorders are placed under the same ASPD symptoms. All in all, despite the negative traits we hear about individuals categorised as psychopaths, some end up as leaders or powerful players in society and others as criminals, illustrating how psychopathic behaviour may differ from one individual to another. The result of this contrasting difference is due to the different psychopathic traits (or the number of traits) one might harness.
Early research on psychopathy suggested the disorder often stemmed from issues relating to the parent-child attachment, such as, emotional deprivation, parental rejection, and a lack of affection. However, other researchers suggest it may be the other way around; children with serious behavioural problems may end up with attachment issues because of their behaviour. All in all, psychopathic traits derive from several factors: genetics, neurological alterations, adverse parenting, and maternal prenatal risks (e.g., exposure to toxins in utero). Perhaps this means we are all susceptible to encompassing psychopathic tendencies throughout our childhood (unless your childhood was perfect). A study conducted by researchers at the University of Michigan in 2016, suggests early signs of psychopathy can be found in children as young as 2 years old, as they start to show differences in empathy and conscience throughout their early years of life. But don’t children learn from one another, picking up habits from their friends, school companions and/or teachers? Could it be possible for a child to pick up psychopathic tendencies, as at such a young age you do not fully comprehend what is wrong and right?
Although psychopaths and individuals with psychopathic traits do not fall under the same category, it is possible to exhibit several psychopathic traits without being diagnosed as a psychopath. These traits include antisocial behaviour, narcissism, superficial charm, impulsivity, callous, unemotional traits, lack of guilt, lack of empathy. If you think you may hold one of these traits, you’re probably not wrong, as 1% of the general population meets this criterion and around 4% of psychopathic traits have been cited for in senior positions in the business world. In fact, a recent study ranked the UK at about 3 on the global scale of least empathetic countries (1- being least empathetic and 10 – most empathetic). Interestingly, many among the least empathetic countries were found in Eastern Europe, the least empathetic being Lithuania. Of course, this does not quantify the number of induvials who exhibit psychopathic behaviour in these countries, therefore, we cannot conclude that the UK is a breeding ground for psychopathy (although some might disagree).
Is it bad to be a psychopath? Perhaps having psychopathic traits is a blessing in disguise, as you would make sure to put your needs before others, selfishly ignoring how others around you are affected. Maybe some countries breed psychopathic behaviour, due to extreme lifestyles or difficult childhoods. Ultimately, mental health labelling is creeping closer to the boundary of normal, as we find it easier to put individuals in (metaphorical) boxes, diagnosing their behaviour as abnormal and categorising them as psychopaths or sociopaths. But perhaps we’re missing the bigger picture here… maybe it’s easier to be a “mad” than to be “sane” (whatever that is).
Psychopathic test (not clinically accurate of course, so don’t take it too personally):http://psychopath.channel4.com/quizzes.html
Dolphinmind 