Psychopaths, also known as socio-paths, are people who are unable to live within the written (and unwritten) rules of society. As for whether they're dangerous, here are some examples of famous psychopaths:
-Jack the Ripper
-Hannibal Lecter
-Charles Manson
-Jeffrey Dahmer
-George W. Bush (oh, no, not really, but I just couldn't help myself. He HAS killed more people than all those other guys put together...)
2007-01-06 19:55:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by wood_vulture 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Psychopaths are very wicked. You cannot diagnose someone as insane because of their physical appearance, however Psychopaths are extremely violent, immoral and unprovoked.
Nothing upsets these creatures more than not having control over someone they "think" they should have control over.
All Psychopaths are narcissist. They will have the following characteristics:
- double standards. They truly believe it's ok to treat anyone however they chose but none of their unrighteous acts should apply back to themselves.
- violent. Most are criminals and/or take "pride" in committing immoral acts towards others.
- retired empathy. There is absolutely no empathy in these creatures. Every situation is based upon how much the Psycho can gain, rather it be your attention, reaction or pain. It's always something the Psycho wants, they can care less about the rest of us.
- predator tactics. They stare, stalk and harass targets, in order to gain control. (This is basically the main give away!)
I'm pretty sure on a bad day some of us display unpleasant behavior, but, Psychopaths OWN these characteristics. I've met and dealt with many in my lifetime so I know for a fact how these creatures operate. Never judge a book by its cover because a Psycho can very well be in your mist when you least suspect.
2014-09-29 23:09:16
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Psychopaths are people who have some kind of mental disorder. They are not necessarily dangerous, not always, but in most cases they are. A lot of times you can't tell that someone is a psychopath just by looking at them or even by being with them for hours, and it only emerges afterwards. They may look and act just like normal people at first glance.
2007-01-07 05:02:11
·
answer #3
·
answered by Corrida 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
EXTREMELY HARMFUL. I could name (Naman) but instead I will direct you work of Robert D. Hare of the University of British Columbia (UBC), Canada. He is the foremost authority in the world on the subject of psychopathology/sociopathology. Dr. Hare has devised a series of tests for this serious mental illness, and they have been translated into very many languages and regularly used in every corner of the globe.
They are always harmful in that they are disruptive in the work place. They very often have criminal records. Some are dangerous physically, but not all. They ALL are a cost and a burden to society because of all the destruction they leave in their wake.
2007-01-07 04:19:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by namanselma 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, hell yes. Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer were psychopaths, what do you think? They have no values other than their own gratification, they have no regard for the feelings of others, no empathy, or remorse. They can be charming and appear "normal".
2007-01-07 05:08:02
·
answer #5
·
answered by morahastits 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
psychopaths are usually manipulative, have no concience and are unable to accept responsibility.Usually a psychopath's main goal is to manipulate, hurt and take advantage of other human beings and/or animals for no other reason other than to be destructive.
2007-01-07 08:02:43
·
answer #6
·
answered by sinistersister69 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Often emotionally detached with delusions of grandeur. Yes, harmful.
2007-01-07 04:04:35
·
answer #7
·
answered by Habt our quell 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Imagine - if you can - not having a conscience, none at all, no feelings of guilt or remorse no matter what you do, no limiting sense of concern for the well-being of strangers, friends, or even family members. Imagine no struggles with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish, lazy, harmful, or immoral action you had taken.
And pretend that the concept of responsibility is unknown to you, except as a burden others seem to accept without question, like gullible fools.
Now add to this strange fantasy the ability to conceal from other people that your psychological makeup is radically different from theirs. Since everyone simply assumes that conscience is universal among human beings, hiding the fact that you are conscience-free is nearly effortless.
You are not held back from any of your desires by guilt or shame, and you are never confronted by others for your cold-bloodedness. The ice water in your veins is so bizarre, so completely outside of their personal experience, that they seldom even guess at your condition.
In other words, you are completely free of internal restraints, and your unhampered liberty to do just as you please, with no pangs of conscience, is conveniently invisible to the world.
You can do anything at all, and still your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are kept in line by their consciences will most likely remain undiscovered.
How will you live your life?
What will you do with your huge and secret advantage, and with the corresponding handicap of other people (conscience)?
The answer will depend largely on just what your desires happen to be, because people are not all the same. Even the profoundly unscrupulous are not all the same. Some people - whether they have a conscience or not - favor the ease of inertia, while others are filled with dreams and wild ambitions. Some human beings are brilliant and talented, some are dull-witted, and most, conscience or not, are somewhere in between. There are violent people and nonviolent ones, individuals who are motivated by blood lust and those who have no such appetites. [...]
Provided you are not forcibly stopped, you can do anything at all.
If you are born at the right time, with some access to family fortune, and you have a special talent for whipping up other people's hatred and sense of deprivation, you can arrange to kill large numbers of unsuspecting people. With enough money, you can accomplish this from far away, and you can sit back safely and watch in satisfaction. [...]
Crazy and frightening - and real, in about 4 percent of the population....
The prevalence rate for anorexic eating disorders is estimated a 3.43 percent, deemed to be nearly epidemic, and yet this figure is a fraction lower than the rate for antisocial personality. The high-profile disorders classed as schizophrenia occur in only about 1 percent of [the population] - a mere quarter of the rate of antisocial personality - and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say that the rate of colon cancer in the United States, considered "alarmingly high," is about 40 per 100,000 - one hundred times lower than the rate of antisocial personality.
The high incidence of sociopathy in human society has a profound effect on the rest of us who must live on this planet, too, even those of us who have not been clinically traumatized. The individuals who constitute this 4 percent drain our relationships, our bank accounts, our accomplishments, our self-esteem, our very peace on earth.
Yet surprisingly, many people know nothing about this disorder, or if they do, they think only in terms of violent psychopathy - murderers, serial killers, mass murderers - people who have conspicuously broken the law many times over, and who, if caught, will be imprisoned, maybe even put to death by our legal system.
We are not commonly aware of, nor do we usually identify, the larger number of nonviolent sociopaths among us, people who often are not blatant lawbreakers, and against whom our formal legal system provides little defense.
Most of us would not imagine any correspondence between conceiving an ethnic genocide and, say, guiltlessly lying to one's boss about a coworker. But the psychological correspondence is not only there; it is chilling. Simple and profound, the link is the absence of the inner mechanism that beats up on us, emotionally speaking, when we make a choice we view as immoral, unethical, neglectful, or selfish.
Most of us feel mildly guilty if we eat the last piece of cake in the kitchen, let alone what we would feel if we intentionally and methodically set about to hurt another person.
Those who have no conscience at all are a group unto themselves, whether they be homicidal tyrants or merely ruthless social snipers.
The presence or absence of conscience is a deep human division, arguably more significant than intelligence, race, or even gender.
What differentiates a sociopath who lives off the labors of others from one who occasionally robs convenience stores, or from one who is a contemporary robber baron - or what makes the difference betwen an ordinary bully and a sociopathic murderer - is nothing more than social status, drive, intellect, blood lust, or simple opportunity.
What distinguishes all of these people from the rest of us is an utterly empty hole in the psyche, where there should be the most evolved of all humanizing functions.
2007-01-07 04:04:10
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
those who are not 'NORMAL' people-ofcourse 'HARMFUL' to all-knowing reason,violent ways of making obident and civilised -someone 'unruly',naming alternatives as pathology
2007-01-07 03:59:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by Amitumi 9 2
·
0⤊
0⤋