--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I was intrigued by Gerbal's definition of sociopath: "it simply > indicates someone who has no sense of or possibly no respect >for > someone else's sense of "boundaries" (among other things)." > > I thought, Ok, I know any number of people who do not know, are > insensitive to, or show little or no respect other's else's sense of > "boundaries". Even on this list, various names come flying at you, who > - at least at times -- if not often -- have that attribute. > > People who will hammer someone over the head, even if initially their > point is valid, over and over again -- beyond most people's sense of > relevance and good taste. Name-callers, repeated characterization of > people who are "stupid, unevolved and without spiritual experience', > an embarrassing barrage quite above and and beyond a "normal" senses > of balance, fairness and measured response in the fabric and > boundarires of "normal" social interactions. Loud-mouthed, boorish and > blazen repetition of theories that have little foundation in science > -- beyond most people's normal boundaries of what constitutes common > sense and and a quite stilted lack of response to normal feedback > queues. Defenders of their own works, so hyper-intensive and > voluminous, as to break most people's boundaries of adequacy -- if not > also their ability and willingness to either read or respond to such > torrents of self-defense. > > These "listers" are examples -- there are other possibly relevant > profiles from the list. Including myself -- but thats too easy. :) > > And of course there is MMY whose job it is to break peoples > boundaries. So in that sense, any teacher is a sociopath -- if the > definition is restricted to ignoring or breaking (through) a persons > status-quo boundaries. > > But in reading the various cites, there is more to it than "lack of > respect for boundaries" (as Gerbal acknowledges, but dos not > articulate.) And one problem or issue with the author of the book, is > she mixes the attributes of three major sociopath "criteria". > Regardless, here are some more mixed-list attritues: > > * Glibness and Superficial Charm > > OK, well, at least one of the listers above come to mind. And possibly > MMY. He had glibness and charm. I am not sure the charm was > superficial. Others argue it was. > > * Manipulative and Conning -- They never recognize the rights of > others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They > appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, > seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may > dominate and humiliate their victims. > > From the listers, one, possible two come to mind, the others are > neither charming nor perhaps adept enough to actually have victims. > > But to say "NEVER recognize the rights of others" is too harsh. > Several exhibit this sometimes. "See their self-serving behaviors as > permissible" does fit. "They appear to be charming," fits one. "[they] > are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an > instrument to be used." Eell, sort of fits, again a bit to harsh or > black and white. "They may dominate and humiliate their victims." > Several may try to dominate and humiliate, but often end up > humiliating themselves, IMO. > > As far as MMY, to me this is way to superficial a critique. While he > may not have always respected peoples boundaries (and for him as > teacher, that usually would be a good thing) -- and "ran over people" > at times (and other times was quite caring and sweet) -- I don't see > it as a way to gain pleasure. It was simply his way of managing to get > things done. For a larger, world cause. That doesn't justify it but, > to say he tried to "dominate and humiliate his victims' for his own > pleasure is laughable. > > > * Grandiose Sense of Self > > Fits at least one lister. > > And MMY. Brahman. :) Or, at least that it was on his shoulders to > spiritual regenerate the world. Do all "messiahs", by definition, have > a messiah complex? > > > *Feels entitled to certain things as "their right." > > Doesn't well fit the listers -- does fit MMY. > > > * Pathological Lying -- Has no problem lying coolly and easily and > it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. > > One of the listers comes to mind. Another doesn't lie, just doesn't > know any better. > > And MMY? -- well certainly there are various POV's. One being that in > the realm of knowledge, he "spun", and/or "packaged" the knowledge he > gained from SBS in ways comptible with the West. Maybe he did a good > job at that, maybe not so good. But thats not "lying". > > Organizationally, yes, "non-truths" ruled the day at times, if not often. > > > *Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their > own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass > lie detector tests. > > Possibly one lister fits. And MMY -- yes, probably more and more so > over time. > > > * Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt -- A deep seated rage, which is > split off and repressed, is at their core. > > Thats hard to say what drives the list members. Could be some inner > rage issues for a few, > but doesn't seem to fit. And for MMY, it doesn't seem to fit at all. > > > *Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets > and opportunities. > > > Two of the listers fit that bill to a degree. As does MMY. > > > * The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in > their way. > > MMY! > > > * Shallow Emotions -- When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, > love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an > ulterior motive. > > Possibly one lister. MMY, I don't see it. If anything he was a "big wave". > > > * Outraged by insignificant matters, > > Well one lister for sure. > > And some might say MMY. Though in that case, what is "significant"? > Get in the way of the "Plan" and he will get angry at you. is that > sociopathic? I don't think so. > > > * yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. > > Some stories of MMY fit this. Are these stories credible -- and do > they represent the majority of his int eractions - or a small slice? > > > * Need for Stimulation > Living on the edge. Verbal outbursts and physical punishments > are normal. Promiscuity and gambling are common. > > One lister, probably. > > MMY -- well always the need to keep moving ahead. Consistent with all > good executives. > > > * Callousness/Lack of Empathy -- Unable to empathize with the pain > of their victims, having only contempt for others' feelings of > distress and readily taking advantage of them. > > Doesn't fit the listers so much in total, some flavor of that at times. > > MMY? As above --- some stories of MMY fit this. Are these stories > credible -- and do they represent the majority of his int eractions - > or a small slice? > > > * Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature -- Rage and abuse, > alternating with small expressions of love and approval produce an > addictive cycle for abuser and abused, as well as creating > hopelessness in the victim. Believe they are all-powerful, > all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, > no concern for their impact on others. > > Too "big" for the listers. > > MMY -- some would say thats "spot on". For me, thats too simplistic an > analysis. > > > * Irresponsibility/Unreliability -- Not concerned about wrecking > others' lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation > they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even > for acts they obviously committed. > > As above -- too "big" for the listers. MMY -- some would say thats > "spot on". For me, thats too simplistic an analysis. > > > * Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity > Promiscuity, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual acting out of > all sorts. > > Well, one lister fits the promiscuity and sexual acting out of all > sorts mold. > > MMY ? Well ... clearly various POVs. > > > * Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle -- Tends to move > around a lot or makes all encompassing promises for the future, poor > work ethic but exploits others effectively. > > Possibly one lister. Maybe not. > > MMY? "Tends to move around a lot" -- he used to but thats part of > the job description. "makes all encompassing promises for the future" > -- haha yes, but again, thats part of the job description. Did he do > it well -- thats another question. "poor work ethic" Doesn't fit. > "exploits others effectively" -- Depends on the definition and > connotation of "exploit". > > Conclusion. None of the above are sociopaths -- if most of the > attributes need to be met. If three attributes need to be met -- maybe > a few listers are. > > But thats a pretty loose and wide-open definition. MANY differnt > types of people may meet three of the above attributes. >
You are dancing, but not facing the music. What good does it do anyone for you to indicate per your list that "possibly one lister" fits the criteria that you are describing? You obviously have people in mind, but do not name them. It doesn't accomplish much that way. Frozen. Either name the names or quit the coy act. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
