Paranoid Hatred of Psychopaths
I consider myself many things. I am an American, a woman, a human, a baby boomer, a sexual masochist and a psychopath. But, more than anything else, I consider myself a philosopher. Psychopaths are considered, more than most anything else, “pathological liars.” That is the characteristic I have the most trouble identifying with. Sure, I can lie when it is necessary (meaning to my advantage). But I also deeply love the Truth. As a philosopher, I have sought Truth all my life. I remember pondering philosophical questions literally in the crib. The philosophical field I find most compelling is Epistemology: the study of, not what is Truth, but how we know Truth. That is my life’s work.
I have always known that I am an outsider. Being an outsider gives me a perspective that enables me to see things that many people miss. The ability to deconstruct concepts most people take for granted is a powerful tool. I know I am different from most people and exploring the answer to what it all means has been, not only my passion, but also my joy.
The Psychopathic Times (Narcissist Nation) has been a rich source of articles that make me think. They have been the inspiration for many of my blog posts. The article I am discussing today, The Psychopath: A Different Species? IV published by INFRAKSHUN, it badly written. I have had to struggle to figure out what the author is saying. The article begins with a quote from a web site called pomerology.com:
“The ultimate cause of evil lies in the interaction of two human factors: 1) normal human ignorance and weakness and 2) the existence and action of a statistically small (4-8% of the general population) but extremely active group of psychologically deviant individuals. The ignorance of the existence of such psychological differences is the first criterion of ponerogenesis. That is, such ignorance creates an opening whereby such individuals can act undetected.”
Hmm… We see that this is trying to suss out the “ultimate cause of evil.” The “causes” are two: ignorance and an active minority. Hitler could have said this. Jews in Germany were a minority (now an even tinier minority). But what is pomerology? Merriam Webster says, “Ponerology definition is – a branch of theology dealing with the doctrine of evil. a branch of theology dealing with the doctrine of evil…” Wikipedia says, “In theology, ponerology (from Greek poneros, “evil”) is a study of evil. Major subdivisions of the study are the nature of evil, the origin of evil, and evil in relation to the Divine Government.” Although ponerology is claimed to be scientific, we see from these definitions that it is theological. Science is supposed to be universal. But theology can only apply to the beliefs of a particular religion. And yet, this article claims to be stating a universal truth. Mankind has fought many a bloody war over theological differences between different countries. The more enlightened ones have accepted the wisdom of letting theology be a private belief system that is only binding on the believers.
The word psychopathy has always confounded psychologists who want to be scientific. Science tells us what is, not what should be. Morality is about what should be. It is derived from the field of philosophy called Ethics and/or from theology. Some, George Simon, for example, have even fallen into the temptation to call psychopathy a character disorder rather than a personality disorder. Of course, the very word, disorder, is judgemental. Since psychology deals with human behavior and thought patterns, it is, perhaps, impossible to develop a “science” of psychology that is morally neutral.
The article discussed here claims that our government is controlled by a minority consisting of psychopaths. M.K. Styllinski, like many others, holds the paranoid view that Psychopaths (are) Running the World. Funny how psychology was supposed to destigmatize “mental illness.” But stigma is a powerful phenomenon and not so easily vanquished. Psychologists hoped that understanding would lead to acceptance. Writers like Styllinski, Peck, Simon are steering the “science” back to moral judgement. I thought my essay comparing psychopaths with Jews in Nazi Germany was somewhat overwrought. But blaming a minority for everything that goes wrong is just what this article and others like it does just that, doesn’t it? These writers use all the technical language of psychology, the science, to justify these judgements. Styllinski explains that the small minority of actual psychopaths has gotten control of a larger group of mostly weak-minded folk who are doing our bidding. (Gosh, I could use a group of willing slaves. Where are mine?) The result is something Styllinski fancifully calls Pathocracy. It seems he is a bipartisan abuser. Not only does Trump preside over this new world order, Obama did too. I wonder when our democracy turned into a pathocracy? Which president was the first? Or has the government of the United States always been a pathocracy?