Psychopathy and Narcissism

[Simon Attwood]

David, Hi

I's very difficult to reply to all your comments because of the way you have broken them down and separated the quotes, so i'm going to pick and choose a few areas, if you don't mind..

you asked how I could be so certain that a mother would have maternal instincts and i ask you; how could you be so certain that she couldn't?

just because an instinct isn't apparent in someone's behaviour doesn't mean it isn't there, it might just mean that a stronger instinct has undermined that instinct.

Do I believe that psychopaths and narcissist have maternal instincts? Yes I do. I also believe that the catagories of psychopath and narcissist are prehistoric left overs of Kraepelinian ideas and that the Kraepelinian taxonomy of mental illnesses needs to be radically revised.

you say that psychopaths often don't feel anxiety or fear; how can you be so certain of this? Just because it isn't an expressed feeling?

as to the rest, I think we will have to agree to disagree

 

[Jazzey]

Re: Letting go?

David, Hi...
You say that psychopaths often don't feel anxiety or fear; how can you be so certain of this? Just because it isn't an expressed feeling?

Because extensive research has demonstrated that Simon. Not to mention that Dr. Baxter is an expert...I'm not saying to stop analyzing or thinking, but I myself typically defer to professionals - both professionally and personally.

Having been raised by a narcissist - no, I don't think she had maternal instincts. But that's a personal opinion. I'm not an expert in mental health.

I had small children in my home all weekend this past weekend, what they experienced here in my home, with their parents, versus what I experienced as a child - two very different things. A narcissist or psychopath really doesn't care about anyone other than themselves.

Aside from being a survivor of childhood sexual abuse, I'm also a victim of rape, last year. The perpetrator, I really don't doubt, was a psychopath - I begged him for days to not hurt me - it just didn't happen that way. Why? Because he's a psychopath, unable to be empathetic to anyone. He thrives on his own needs and can't possibly understand fear, pain, desperation in others - he's just mentally incapable of it and more importantly, doesn't care... Trust me - I've done research on this topic for the past year.

And, again, I prefer to rely on the experts in this area, rather than my own layperson research.

 

[David Baxter PhD]

Re: Letting go?

you asked how I could be so certain that a mother would have maternal instincts and i ask you; how could you be so certain that she couldn't?

Have you ever met a true psychopath or true narcisissist? I don't think so. If you had, you would be a lot less positive about this.

I also believe that the catagories of psychopath and narcissist are prehistoric left overs of Kraepelinian ideas and that the Kraepelinian taxonomy of mental illnesses needs to be radically revised.

You clearly have not met a psychopath face to face. As for debates about the "taxonomy of mental illnesses", that doesn't belong in this thread. It may not belong on this forum.

you say that psychopaths often don't feel anxiety or fear; how can you be so certain of this? Just because it isn't an expressed feeling?

No because I have studied and researched this topic over 30 years, as well as teaching at the university level. And the research shows clear deficits in fear processing, avoidance learning, consequential thinking, and general emotional reasoning in psychopaths. There are numerous books and papers on this topic. I'm not giving an opinion here. This has been demonstrated repeatedly in research going back at least to the 40s and 50s. Look for yourself.

 

[white page]

Re: Letting go?

Hi Simon,
This thread is about supporting AlleyCat, Perhaps you could start a separate thread to discuss your ideas on psychopaths and narcissists We are moving away from Alley Cat's particular issues and questions. Thanks

 

[David Baxter PhD]

Split from http://forum.psychlinks.ca/adult-survivors/19996-letting-go.html

 

[Simon Attwood]

Re: Letting go?

Have you ever met a true psychopath or true narcisissist? I don't think so. If you had, you would be a lot less positive about this.

That, David, is an assumption

As for debates about the "taxonomy of mental illnesses", that doesn't belong in this thread. It may not belong on this forum.

Why?

No because I have studied and researched this topic over 30 years, as well as teaching at the university level. And the research shows clear deficits in fear processing, avoidance learning, consequential thinking, and general emotional reasoning in psychopaths. There are numerous books and papers on this topic. I'm not giving an opinion here. This has been demonstrated repeatedly in research going back at least to the 40s and 50s. Look for yourself.

No David, it is an opinion, but it's an opinion prejudiced and biased by research based upon Kraepelinian ideas, the deficit you mention is only a deficit in expressed behaviour, and this is an important distinction.

I take it this is your site, plus your 30 years research and teaching at university level, it is little wonder that you are defensive of this

 

[Jazzey]

Re: Letting go?

I take it this is your site, plus your 30 years research and teaching at university level, it is little wonder that you are defensive of this

I didn't think that Dr. Baxter was defensive at all. Just expressing an opinion much like you have: You expressed an opinion and, so did Dr. Baxter. And your statement here is actually quite offensive Simon...Please show respect and courtesy to the membership here.

Dr. Baxter is an expert in the field. And that, in my books, is enough to rely on his opinion. As for the taxonomy of mental health - things have evolved Simon. Keep and open ear and, more importantly, an open-mind. We're all here to learn, both from one another and from the posted articles. If you're here just to express entrenched opinions, I would suggest that you've tapped into the wrong forum.

 

[NicNak]

Re: Letting go?

Warning, possable trigger.

No David, it is an opinion, but it's an opinion prejudiced and biased by research based upon Kraepelinian ideas, the deficit you mention is only a deficit in expressed behaviour, and this is an important distinction.

If you don't like the professional opinion of Dr Baxter. Have you ever asked a victim of abuse in the hands of a psychopath, if they survived, how they felt in the hands of a psychopath?

Have you ever tried to speak to a psychopath regarding their feelings toward humans and other beings?

Any of the fear feelings a psychopath "senses" are through the victim, they are preying on. They thrive on seeing those emotions through others.

Have you felt the stare of a psychopathic killer? I have. How they "size you up" to see how easily you might be able to be manipulated? How they seem to zone in on the "weaker" of the group?

There is no negotiating with them, unless it is to their benefit. They feel no remorse or pain within themselves for what they have done.

They may "appear" as though the feel, but the bottom line for them is for self service, period. Nothing else.

This is my first and final reply to this thread. I refuse to aruge about these things when they are highly proven time and time again.

 

[David Baxter PhD]

Re: Letting go?

That, David, is an assumption

A fair one, especially given your avoidance of the question.

As for debates about the "taxonomy of mental illnesses", that doesn't belong in this thread. It may not belong on this forum.

Why?

It didn't belong in the original thread because that thread was started by a member seeking advice and support. To hijack it for a debate about the classification of mental disorders isn't fair to her.

Whether such a debate belongs on this forum at all depends on where it goes or what your agenda is. This is primarily and information and support forum. Please read the Forum Rules - carefully, especially this part:

the following are expressly prohibited on this Forum:

• POSTS THAT ARE ANTI-PSYCHIATRY OR ANTI-MEDICINE IN NATURE (there are other forums where you can engage in such debates -- this is not one of them).

No David, it is an opinion, but it's an opinion prejudiced and biased by research based upon Kraepelinian ideas, the deficit you mention is only a deficit in expressed behaviour, and this is an important distinction.

And the fact that more than 50 years of research demonstrates otherwise is irrelevant? We should just ignore the data and accept your statement as reality?

I don't think so.

I take it this is your site, plus your 30 years research and teaching at university level, it is little wonder that you are defensive of this

If by "defensive" you mean that I will attempt to keep this forum a safe place for members seeking support and as part of that goal I will dispute misinformation posted here, you're absolutely correct.

 

[Simon Attwood]

Re: Letting go?

If you're here just to express entrenched opinions, I would suggest that you've tapped into the wrong forum.

I'd rather say that I am interested in challenging entrenched opinions

 

[Jazzey]

Re: Letting go?

I'd rather say that I am interested in challenging entrenched opinions

Which ones Simon? I'm a little concerned that you're tackling the wrong opinions. Again, a professional person who's expertise deals with the topic isn't expressing "entrenched" opinions.

Rather, that expert is expression expert opinions that are rooted in scientific research, 50 years of research and analysis. I'm uncomfortable with a layperson challenging that research. You do not have the expertise to challenge it thus far.

As Dr. Baxter expressed in his post to you - this website is here to support people who struggle with various issues. Unless you have research to back it up Simon, and by that, I mean concrete scientific research, please tread carefully - many of us depend on this site for insight, understanding into some of these issues. Let's make our best efforts to not confuse the issues.

Here, we're talking about psychopathy and narcissism. There are extensive researches on both areas. Again, I'm not telling you to not use critical thinking but, I am asking that you respect both the research and expert opinions in these areas. Anything less than that is being irresponsible to a vast membership that is seeking knowledge and guidance on their issues. Any opinion expressed on this site has to be done responsibly. Both for the people that are members and those who read threads without being members - I will always challenge unfounded ideologies because, there's an obligation to everyone who read these threads. So, let's do this intelligently.

 

[Simon Attwood]

A fair point that it might not have belonged in the original thread, David, but it was not actually my intention to hijack it regarding classification, but the subject came up and it was my response.

I am most definitely not "anti-psychiatry" and I find the phrase, and your highlighting it quite peculiar and worrisome in terms of it's ambiguity and application. i am, to a certain extent anti catagorisation, because it is limiting and myopic. but I fear, much of the history and evolution of psychiatry is based upon Kraepelin's idea that mental illness can fall in to clearly delineated classifications, right up to the pending DSM-V. I feel that in this area, psychiatry took a wrong fork in the road all those years ago, and it is still struggling to get back on to the right road. your 50 years of research, has, unfortunately been perverted by this false classification

anyway, i'm off to bed

 

[Jazzey]

A fair point that it might not have belonged in the original thread, David, but it was not actually my intention to hijack it regarding classification, but the subject came up and it was my response.

I am most definitely not "anti-psychiatry" and I find the phrase, and your highlighting it quite peculiar and worrisome in terms of it's ambiguity and application. i am, to a certain extent anti catagorisation, because it is limiting and myopic. but I fear, much of the history and evolution of psychiatry is based upon Kraepelin's idea that mental illness can fall in to clearly delineated classifications, right up to the pending DSM-V. I feel that in this area, psychiatry took a wrong fork in the road all those years ago, and it is still struggling to get back on to the right road. your 50 years of research, has, unfortunately been perverted by this false classification

anyway, i'm off to bed

And now, you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. What exactly is your expertise Simon? this is pure crap that you're feeding us. And I'm tired too. So, you're on your own kiddo.

 

[Fiver]

Say, has anyone ever noticed that Yoda sort of looks like a troll? 30+ years of seeing Yoda I have, and only now notice do I the similarities.

 

[Simon Attwood]

What exactly is your expertise Simon? .

Carpentry

 

[crzycadn]

I think Simon's attempts at humour using sarcasm, and his blatant use of terminology that most ordinary people would need to read 2 or 3 times with a dictionary and encyclopedia at hand, and his flippant attitude and veiled insults do not belong in this forum. I do not believe he is seeking support, advice or information, but rather to trigger emotional responses for his own perverse pleasure. This is the last thing I have to say about or to this person and I am very sorry if I have broken any rules - but enough is enough.

 

[AllyCat]

Hi all, I would just like to say that being raised by a narssisist and having to endure her psychopath husband and then psychopath boyfriend. I would like to say that from my experience I have not seen any incling of empathy or mercy from any of them from the age of 5 to 14. That is 9 years of experience. And I might be in a bit of denial about whether it is possible for a narssisist to have a mothers instinct but that is purely because she is my mother and society has dictated to me over the years that "she must love me because she is my mother" but that simply is not true. Now the psychopaths on the other hand had absolutly no remorse or empathy for anyone other than themselves, that is fact. Just thought I'de put my 2 cents in on the subject. Thanks

 

[Simon Attwood]

Hi Crzycadn.

I?ll address each aspect in turn

Firstly; That was not an attempt at humour or sarcasm. I personally don?t like the term expertise, but if I was to define myself with an expertise, then it is indeed carpentry, it is the trade I have most expertise in, although these days I?ve taken a few steps above that and I am currently a contract manager managing a large workforce of carpenters, engineers and artists in the field of scenery building. I suppose a carpenter is not supposed to use words and phrases that you would need a dictionary or encyclopaedia to look up, they are supposed to just suck in their teeth and tell you how much your new extension will cost.

Expertise for me suggests having reached a place of knowing it all and being in a position of unquestioning authority, for me such a place can form as a delusional fortress to protect us from challenge or questioning. Unquestioning authority, for me, reveals a deep insecurity at its core.

As to my blatant use of terminology; I?m not really sure what is blatant about it? As if I am doing it deliberately to upset? I just use the terminology that I am familiar with and that fits the field. I also have participated in a forum or 2 about bladesmithing as it is a hobby of mine. I also use terminology there that refers to steel structure, etc. that the average person would probably not understand unless they looked it up. It just reflects my knowledge, experience and interest in the subject.

I?m not aware of any veiled insults, and if that is how something I have said has come across to anyone, then I unreservedly apologise. If I could be made aware of where I have made a veiled insult, I would appreciate it.

I have not at any point suggested that I am seeking support, advice or information. Are these criteria for being a member here? I rather was thinking that I might have something to give, having been through my own hell and having worked my way out, and was also seeking discussion of ideas.
?Medical Expertise? needs to be questioned and sometimes, we are better medical experts of our own ailments that the medical experts, for instance; every time I get a common cold, it is followed by a sinus infection. I think it has something to do with my phobia of sniffing. I blow my nose very regularly and violently when I have a cold, rather than sniff. My father used to be very intolerant of my sniffing, and this was probably passed on from his mother who was quite a powerful influence over him, but anyway. I go to the doctor and ask for some antibiotics, and it doesn?t matter how many times I go, I always get an argument and the doctor telling me that she thinks it is viral and antibiotics won?t do any good. In this case, I know better than the medical expert and the antibiotics clear up the infection in a few days.

If we simplify things in to a dichotomy, then therapy seems to have 2 opposing approaches, as I mentioned before with my analogies;

1. Is to comfort; to wrap, to make people think (outwardly) that everything is all right. It doesn?t bring out the pain, the hurt so that we can study it and so that it can be healed. For me it seems to enclose it, snuggle it. To plaster over the problem, like a crack in the wall that suggests subsidence, rather than tackling the subsidence directly. It is something not to be touched, or sometimes not to even be discussed or acknowledged. This is the essence of repression. Both Jung and Freud agreed that repression was not a good thing and as Jung put it;

As soon as man was capable of conceiving the idea of sin, he had recourse to psychic concealment - or, to put it in analytical language, repressions arose. Anything that is concealed is a secret. The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates their possessor from the community.

Yet still, a segment of the therapy world promotes this ?Duvet approach? to the treatment of psychic disturbances.

2. Is to bring out the pain and hurt and find a way to get the patient to take a new and healing perspective on them. To dig to the root and expose the infection, so to speak.

It seems that all schools divide themselves in to these opposing approaches. I?ve experienced both approaches being suggested in CBT for example. I?m personally in favour of option 2, I find that option 1 maintains the psychic disturbance, and although option 2 can be painful and distressing, it is ultimately more healing.

Anyway, I almost feel like I have been trapped in to a position of defending myself here, and that is not why I joined up, so I am going to get on with reading people?s posts, and commenting if I feel I have a constructive input to give.

 

[Jazzey]

The intent wasn't to make you feel trapped Simon. At least, it wasn't for me. As for your expertise, I was just wondering if you had mental health expertise. But this doesn't preclude you from having knowledge and an interest in the area.

On this forum, I tend to challenge people's perspectives. Much as you have done on this particular thread. But my intent was not to make you feel uncomfortable or unwelcomed. Rather, I don't agree with some of your ideologies. But you're entitled to them. And besides, you did make me think on this particular thread - that's always welcomed.

 

[Simon Attwood]

Thanks for that, Jazzey

I suppose that, apart from a rather extensive library of reading material, my only experience of mental health has been 45 years of living inside my head :lol:

I read a story a while ago about how Jung and Freud fell out with each other, i'm not sure how true it is because I've not come across any other reference for it, but they spent the night in a hotel after a conference and decided to analyse each others dreams, it didn't go down too well.

If even our most iconic analysts can't help themselves reacting defensively to psychic intrusion, then what hope is there for the rest of us?