Should screening for genetic sociopathy be mandatory for politicians and police?

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by soficrow

 

Would you rather invest with a financial firm that certifies itself sociopath-free or one that doesn't?

Certifies itself is the problem. How can this be made to be believable? What I am saying is, there are logistical problems here. How will we be sure that they didn't pay off the certifying organization? Who controls the certifying agency? Not to be overly pessimistic, but I think you will find few if any upper level executives with no level of sociopathy.

The problem that we would run into is the same one we have with corrupt government organizations. They eventually become owned by the sociopaths that own the corporations. Those guys are not going to sit around and let someone else tell them they can't do whatever they damn well please.

But I think the idea is brilliant if you could figure out how to do it in reality. If you can find a way to make a corporation that is in fact free from sociopaths, I will be the first to buy stock.

reply to post by soficrow


Ahh, but the evidence for genetics is pretty overwhelming at this point, as you'd see if you checked the links provided and searched a bit.

Genetics accounts for over 50% of sociopathic behavior.

Environmental factors and singular stressfull situations can make someone temporaily sociopathic, but those people feel remorse when they return to normal. A true sociopath, a genetic sociopath, will not and can not feel remorse because their amygdalas are malformed compared to non-sociopaths. They lack the physically wiring to be able to care.

So far as a slippery slope...we already test people for drugs and all sorts of other things. This clearly falls under public safety.

reply to post by Universer


Good point.

An independant certification agency would be required.

Perhaps a international non-profit association of eminent and scrupulous psychologists, psychiatrists, medical doctors, and military intelligence interregators?

I include the military because they are pretty well-trained to spot and exploit psychological quirks, and might see what others miss.

But all members must be able to pass the test themselves, of course.

reply to post by apacheman


You are right, there are clear markers for sociopathy and psychopathy, outlined here:


Testing anyone for any reason is the edge of the wedge - sets a solid precedent to justify testing anyone and everyone.

...Think "Voter Competency Testing." Just for starters.

Then envision a world where everyone is tested, at birth, to determine and define their caste, profession and future. Is that what you want?

reply to post by apacheman

Actually, there are clear markers for sociopathy.

I am interested, but not well researched on the issue. When reading the list of traits there was a few that I do have. But when it comes to the crunch of if I am attracted or repulsed by pain in others, I am clearly repulsed. I have had more than my fair share of pain and know all too well what the repercussions are. I do not want my personal identity to be defined by promoting pain in others. But as a kid I have made many mistakes and it did take some hard lessons to know where the line is.

From my reading, it's next to impossible to successfully treat a sociopath: they can't be "cured" in any normal sense of the word.

When people are raised in a war environment it is easier to understand their detachment, like with George Soros for example. One ethically controversial and highly risky treatment that has produced some sudden and significant changes in character is with the experience of Near Death Experiences. This does not work for everyone, but some people that have been clinically dead for a short period of time have had vast improvements in their understanding, values and approach to life. There is still a lot unknown about the after life, spirit and soul, yet there are some very interesting scientific studies around that indicates that something is going on. With a better understanding of this area it could also provide some valuable tools and capabilities in treating this problem.

reply to post by apacheman


Psycho/sociopathy has become a hot topic on ATS lately.

In short, YES they should all be screened.

reply to post by LazloFarnsworth

you could probably only assess potential for becoming either.

That's the gist of it, right there. We can only assess potentialities and for communities to exert undue hardship towards those who as yet, have committed no crime, is a very hairy subject. Creating a police state on the premise of these unknowns; this is decidedly out of constitutional boundaries at this time. But still... I'm also inclined to seek after a foolproof way to id these people, to avert further large-scale and needless mayhem. Perhaps this is futile, as these two ideas cancel themselves out? And then the issue of any other information gathered, that could be used against whatever people, or groups who may not at the time be in the ruling parties favor? There's a movie in this, somewhere!

I have little faith in those psychological tests. I mean, police officers have to undergo psychological testing and,clearly, there have been many of them who have not been psychologically sound candidates to be working that position.

Psychological tests can't be taken at face value all the time.

reply to post by soficrow


It's a huge jump from a clear test for sociopathy to assigning people to castes at birth.

The test I have in mind is only invoked when someone aspires to a job that gives them power over other people.

Don't want to take the test?

Fine by me.

But then you can't hold those positions.

Don't want to drive?

Great: no driving test.

Same difference.

It is reasonable to verify capacity prior to giving over the keys.

In this case, a capacity to care about others.

reply to post by lowundertheradar


Unfortunately, sociopathy is not about potential, it is either/or.

You either are a genetic sociopath or you aren't.

If you are, then you can't care about the well-being of others.

It doesn't necessarily mean you are a criminal, but it does mean that you shouldn't be allowed access to the controls of society.

Be a farmer or businessman, but you can't be a politican or a police officer, it's just too societally risky.

I don't understand how a socio could be -trusted- to be -honest- on a questionair test. They should only be FMRId. (Funtional Magnetic Resonance Imaging).
I used to not be honest on tests (including personality) and applications for jobs. My thinking -at that time- was, "And why should I be? I want the job."

reply to post by simone50m


From what I understand about the tests for sociopathy, they don't rely on the honesty of the test-taker, but instead look at patterns of choices.

I have no doubt that a rigorous test could be devised, but follow-up physical testing is quite necessary if the suspicion of sociopathy is there. Set the threshold value low enought to catch the potential sociopaths, high enough to eliminate the clearly non-sociopathic.

But a full and thorough screening should be required for all potential sociopaths.

Why do we need a test? Anyone who aspires to those positions of power is a sociopath period! Best thing to do is eliminate those positions in society. And live the universal law of no harm no crime. Someone commits a crime his neighbors deal with him or her. Government, police, and ruling bodies etc. were created by psychopaths for the express purpose of gaining power over others and insulating themselves from the consequences of their harmful actions!

Society is a Blessing, But Government is Evil. Thomas Paine

reply to post by apacheman


No need to be disrespectful. But btw...

There is no "evidence" for "genetic predetermination" - our bodies, brains and environment comprise an elegantly complex interraction of systems, better understood using systems analysis than "simple" molecular genetics. Current research in brain "plasticity," neuroscience and proteomics alone reveals far more than genetics does - and proves that not much is fixed and static - not our brain structure, nor even our "genetic make-up."

As far as psychopathies go, Andreoli pointed out back in 2002 that it's more useful to study the relationship between genetics and brain plasticity.

The complexity of psychiatric nosography and the “simplicity” of molecular genetics

…If the psychiatric field is to be related with the plasticity of the brain, and then to its ability to be reorganized relative to experiences, it seems to be more important to study the relation between genetics and brain plasticity. It therefore seems more significant today, to be raising questions rather than gathering data.

This paper clarifies how "resilient adaptation" modifies brain structure:

The Developing Brain and Neural Plasticity: Implications for Normality, Psychopathology, and Resilience

… THE BRAIN AS A DYNAMIC, SELF- ORGANIZING DEVELOPMENTAL SYSTEM
In present-day neuroscience, information in the brain is viewed as being represented and processed by distributed groups of neurons that maintain a functional interconnection based on experiential demands rather than by a strictly predetermined scheme…

It has become increasingly clear that the investigation of developmental processes, typical and atypical, often necessitates the simultaneous examination of individuals utilizing a multiple-levels-of-analysis approach…

Related: Early behavioral intervention, brain plasticity, and the prevention of autism spectrum disorder

So far as a slippery slope...we already test people for drugs and all sorts of other things. This clearly falls under public safety.

I agree. So did Hitler's Eugenics Policies and Concentration Camp Legislation.


…Rather than worshipping at the alter of predetermination and genetics, may I suggest a rational tour of current research in brain plasticity?

reply to post by hawkiye


I know I'm not supposed to say simply, "agreed", so let me step right out there and say," totally agreed"!

reply to post by apacheman

It's a huge jump from a clear test for sociopathy to assigning people to castes at birth.

Not at all: both assume genetic predetermination, and lack of "plasticity" or capacity for change.

The test I have in mind is only invoked when someone aspires to a job that gives them power over other people. ...In this case, a capacity to care about others.

Such a test is absolutely unbelievably pointless when corporate law requires sociopathic behavior and moreover, overrides other laws if there is a conflict.

Law enforcement already goes through psych screening as part of the hiring process.

I think additional screening is unnecessary.

What should be common practice is that bad officers are fired and/or prosecuted.

ETA: There are plenty of psychopaths who work at the local Wal-Mart who try to lord it over people.

Have you ever seen some of the people who work third shift?

Spooky.

reply to post by hawkiye


I know the system is sick, but I am not convinced that writing it off is the best solution. Life is complex and there are many different specialist roles and organisational bodies required to help provide some standards, communication and capability. Sure some roles of the government, police, military, legal and banking have gone way too far with the power games and stresses of the job. When you do want that neighbour to come help out with a break in or other crime, the police do have a lot of good resources and experience. While they may lose it from time to time so would the neighbourhood if it was left to sort out its own mess.

Originally posted by kwakakev
reply to post by hawkiye

 

I know the system is sick, but I am not convinced that writing it off is the best solution. Life is complex and there are many different specialist roles and organisational bodies required to help provide some standards, communication and capability. Sure some roles of the government, police, military, legal and banking have gone way too far with the power games and stresses of the job. When you do want that neighbour to come help out with a break in or other crime, the police do have a lot of good resources and experience. While they may lose it from time to time so would the neighbourhood if it was left to sort out its own mess.

Government and police etc. kill, harm, and ruin more peoples lives who have harmed no one than any other group. I'll take my chances with the nieghbors thanks! Read my Thomas Paine link it will open your eyes on why we don't need those people. People think society would break down without those people but society existed long before those positions did and took care of all those functions just fine without them.

reply to post by hawkiye

Government and police etc. kill, harm, and ruin more peoples lives who have harmed no one than any other group.

We have been killing since the first bacteria found something smaller to eat. In terms of humanity, the hunters where the first local militia and the law. There will always be a law, either that of the jungle, man, society, civilisation or globalisation. The Earth has already been through the dark ages and if the population is to continue to grow then it does need some cohesion and organisation to share and distribute the global resources. I do agree that there are small communities that can work well together and be independent from everything else going on. When it comes to cities the situation is different and the teamwork that keeps the small community together is fractured due to the population and competition over resources in a limited space. How many people do you think would die if the water gets turned off of the food stops showing up in a big city?

I know there are problems in the system and I do agree that testing for sociopathy is one thing that can help for roles of power. Accountability and transparency are also big issues that needs to be addressed as well as the way the economy is structured. If we can get 9/11 reinvestigated then we have a chance to clean out a lot of these corporate criminals. WW3 is causing a lot of stress globally and there is a chance you may get your wish as the system falls over if it moves to the next level. I am expecting something along the lines of Mad Max if this happens, there will be no resources to address the deeper issues of character and we will have to start fighting just to survive again.

I tried the link but the page is not showing up