Discussion Do you think a lack of conscience would make it easier to ctb?

[toolateforme]

I don't remember where I read about this, but a very small percentage of psychopaths are female. Among those who do happen to be both female and psychopath, a high percentage are interestingly also transgender. However, because these individuals lack a conscience, they are not afflicted by gender dysphoria - they know they wish to be a different gender, but they don't experience the kind of distress that other non-psychopathic transgenders suffer.

This brings to me to wonder whether a psychopath's lack of conscience would make it easier to commit suicide, if they wished to do so. I've known a few psychopaths, and I found myself envious of their effortless charisma & self-directedness... despite them having used their 'gift' to commit callous, unsavory deeds. I've often wondered how different I would be if I wasn't plagued by a conscience. Would I have already pushed myself to CTB, or would I even be suicidal in the first place?

 

[Rollo]

Lack of conscience I think yes would make it easier to ctb and no I think you won't be suicidal in the first place. Psycopath though is really a highly subjective notion. I'm thinkig of Christian Bale running around naked, screaming and slashing everyone with a chainsaw. But lack of conscience means somebody's conscience is smaller than yours. Like robber's. But I don't think they are considered psycopaths by society. A very frivoulus term.

 

[toolateforme]

Sociopaths and psychopaths tend to be misunderstood. I know psychopaths have a complete lack of conscience - it just isn't there at all - whereas sociopaths do have a conscience, but it's just easier for them to ignore. They both know when they're doing the wrong thing. Psychopaths just won't care, whereas sociopaths might care, but those feelings are easier to sweep under the rug.

I've sometimes wished I could elect to remove my conscience entirely. It would be nice to be able to make decisions without the influence of a conscience.

Also, one of the psychopaths I knew had actually attempted suicide in the past. I am really curious to know what their feelings were like up until the moment of the attempt, and how they'd compare to the feelings of a suicidal person with a conscience.

 

[Rollo]

Sociopaths and psychopaths tend to be misunderstood. I know psychopaths have a complete lack of conscience - it just isn't there at all - whereas sociopaths do have a conscience, but it's just easier for them to ignore. They both know when they're doing the wrong thing. Psychopaths just won't care, whereas sociopaths might care, but those feelings are easier to sweep under the rug.

I've sometimes wished I could elect to remove my conscience entirely. It would be nice to be able to make decisions without the influence of a conscience.

Also, one of the psychopaths I knew had actually attempted suicide in the past. I am really curious to know what their feelings were like up until the moment of the attempt, and how they'd compare to the feelings of a suicidal person with a conscience.

But how do you know somebody has a complete lack of conscience? Like in the good old days you're chilling with your family in your waterfront hut, then a viking raiding party pays visit, kills your father, take everything you have and carry you and your mother as slaves (maybe to be ransomed later). And they won't have a second thought about it. Still some of them may take kindly to you and cut you some slack when it comes to some things. Then again others won't. But even those that won't will care for their mothers, relatives and friends.

Or take animals. Is hunter a psychopath? Meanwhile go hunt cats or dogs and most likely that's the definition you're going to fall under. So to me 'psychopath' is a highly subjective notion.

And actually I thought 'sociopath' means totally different thing - somebody who's afraid or shy of society. A socially anxious guy who keeps to himself.

 

[toolateforme]

But how do you know somebody has a complete lack of conscience? Like in the good old days you're chilling with your family in your waterfront hut, then a viking raiding party pays visit, kills your father, take everything you have and carry you and your mother as slaves (maybe to be ransomed later). And they won't have a second thought about it. Still some of them may take kindly to you and cut you some slack when it comes to some things. Then again others won't. But even those that won't will care for their mothers, relatives and friends.

Or take animals. Is hunter a psychopath? Meanwhile go hunt cats or dogs and most likely that's the definition you're going to fall under. So to me 'psychopath' is a highly subjective notion.

And actually I thought 'sociopath' means totally different thing - somebody who's afraid or shy of society. A socially anxious guy who keeps to himself.

I don't think there's a way to know for sure if someone else actually lacks a conscience, without examining an MRI of their brain - psychopaths have structural abnormalities evident in MRI scans of the brain, which aren't found in non-psychopaths.

Antisociality/sociopathy is sometimes mixed up with social anxiety, yeah. Someone who is socially anxious is considered asocial, whereas a sociopath is considered antisocial. Socially anxious people shy away from society, whereas sociopaths tend to exhibit behaviors that are considered detrimental to society (hence the term "anti-social").

Wikipedia actually has a really good article on psychopathy, here.

 

[Rollo]

I don't think there's a way to know for sure if someone else actually lacks a conscience, without examining an MRI of their brain - psychopaths have structural abnormalities evident in MRI scans of the brain, which aren't found in non-psychopaths.

Antisociality/sociopathy is sometimes mixed up with social anxiety, yeah. Someone who is socially anxious is considered asocial, whereas a sociopath is considered antisocial. Socially anxious people shy away from society, whereas sociopaths tend to exhibit behaviors that are considered detrimental to society (hence the term "anti-social").

Wikipedia actually has a really good article on psychopathy, here.

But if it was so simple as that psychopath is somebody who's conscience is totally absent and it always corresponds with some abnormalities on MRI brain scan - then wiki article would put it just like that. Instead it dances around saying how it means 'impaired' (not absent) empathy, egoistical traits and that different conceptions of 'psychopathy' were used throughout history which may be contradictory and that there are 'multiple conceptualizations of psychopathy'. So like I said - 'psychopathy' is entirely in the eye of the beholder. At least that's my point of view - don't want to force it on anyone.

 

[toolateforme]

But if it was so simple as that psychopath is somebody who's conscience is totally absent and it always corresponds with some abnormalities on MRI brain scan - then wiki article would put it just like that. Instead it dances around saying how it means 'impaired' (not absent) empathy, egoistical traits and that different conceptions pf 'psychopathy' were used throughout history which may be contradictory and that there are 'multiple conceptualizations of psychopathy'. So like I said - 'psychopathy' is entirely in the eye of the beholder. At least that's my point of view - don't want to force it on anyone.

I didn't say it was simple :( It's not. But let's not let the thread derail into a debate... we can also disregard the notion of psychopathy completely & look at what it would be like to have no conscience.

 

[Rollo]

I didn't say it was simple :( It's not. But let's not let the thread derail into a debate... we can also disregard the notion of psychopathy completely & look at what it would be like to have no conscience.

No problem. On my part I can say that having absolutely no conscience would be unhealthy. Not nearly as unhealthy as to have a maximum possible conscience where you spend every bit of your free time trying to help somebody, spend all your money on charity and will never do anything if it means even slightly diminishing somebody else's wellbeing. But unhealthy still. And it actually remains to be seen whether there are real people living any of these two maxims out. But there are certainly those coming close.

So it's not so much as what it would be like to have no conscience but rather what it would be like to have less conscience. Although since less means that in some aspect, in some particular choice, conscience is gone, then you can put it as having 'no conscience'. But only for this particular aspect.

 

[toolateforme]

No problem. On my part I can say that having absolutely no conscience would be unhealthy. Not nearly as unhealthy as to have a maximum possible conscience where you spend every bit of your free time trying to help somebody, spend all your money on charity and will never do anything if it means even slightly diminishing somebody else's wellbeing. But unhealthy still. And it actually remains to be seen whether there are real people living any of these two maxims out. But there are certainly those coming close.

So it's not so much as what it would be like to have no conscience but rather what it would be like to have less conscience. Although since less means that in some aspect, in some particular choice, conscience is gone, then you can put it as having 'no conscience'. But only for this particular aspect.

Yeah, having absolutely no conscience would be the extreme end of things. It's fun to fantasize about (for me at least) but it would probably do more harm than good. Hell, I'd probably still be suicidal, just for different reasons - who knows.

Less conscience generally comes with less inhibition, which would help if one is looking to CTB. This is why some people choose to drink a lot before attempting the act. Borderline personality disorder is another interesting case to look at regarding this - they tend to have little to no inhibition, but their conscience tends to weigh too heavy according to personal accounts I've read. There's also a high self-harm and suicide rate among the BPD population, and so clearly their lack of inhibition hasn't increased their quality of life.

 

[Rollo]

Yeah, having absolutely no conscience would be the extreme end of things. It's fun to fantasize about (for me at least) but it would probably do more harm than good. Hell, I'd probably still be suicidal, just for different reasons - who knows.

Less conscience generally comes with less inhibition, which would help if one is looking to CTB. This is why some people choose to drink a lot before attempting the act. Borderline personality disorder is another interesting case to look at regarding this - they tend to have little to no inhibition, but their conscience tends to weigh too heavy according to personal accounts I've read. There's also a high self-harm and suicide rate among the BPD population, and so clearly their lack of inhibition hasn't increased their quality of life.

Honestly no I don't think it will do that much harm to you and you will be hardly suicidal. Harm to others though - that's a different issue. From society's point of view there can be no such thing as too much empathy, too much conscience (unless it runs afoul of society's values which demand some people be treated harshly). No such thing as too nice of a guy. So there's a huge concentrated and elaborate effort by all elements of society to push one into 'more conscience' direction. Thus fantasizing about 'no conscience' is fun just cause it acts in opposite direction.

I don't really understand clearly what 'inhibition' means. I take it that inhibition means same as shyness and social anxiety. Drinking definitely helps with that - as one guy said 'before drink you're too uptight to sing in the shower, after drink you're singing in the street'. And it helps with 'general anxiety', fear, too, gives you 'liquid courage'. I don't think it's possible that reduced shyness and social anxiety won't increase your quality of life. It's just there may be other issues and if your general anxiety is reduced too - you may off yourself more readily. Still to be honest I'm skeptical about the whole mental health industry and I don't know whether this 'borderline personality disorder' actually represents real unhealthiness and if it does whether they correctly pinpoint where the problem is.

As far as less conscience coming with less inhibition it's true to me. Which doesn't necessarily mean one will be able to reduce his conscience just cause he want less inhibition. Cause such a choice is a very important one in itself and can't be propelled by any supposed convenience it will lead to. But the link is there I agree. I also agree that less inhibition will make it easier to ctb. But to me more importantly such a choice (less conscience) can make one less suicidal simply by itself.

 

[Anarchy]

I'd say that it wouldn't necessarily be easier to CTB with a lack of conscience. Even if someone doesn't care about others, they can care about themself and feel bad about ending themself. Also, someone with a lack of conscience can still have dreams, and might feel badly about not having a chance to fulfill those dreams. They can still feel unsure about their plan and fear death and worry that they might never be around to see things get better.
They can still feel anxious about failing and ending up a 'vegetable' or sectioned.
There are many things that stop people from ending it, and a regard for how others feel is only one of many reasons.

 

[creatureoflight]

Yeah, having absolutely no conscience would be the extreme end of things. It's fun to fantasize about (for me at least) but it would probably do more harm than good. Hell, I'd probably still be suicidal, just for different reasons - who knows.

Less conscience generally comes with less inhibition, which would help if one is looking to CTB. This is why some people choose to drink a lot before attempting the act. Borderline personality disorder is another interesting case to look at regarding this - they tend to have little to no inhibition, but their conscience tends to weigh too heavy according to personal accounts I've read. There's also a high self-harm and suicide rate among the BPD population, and so clearly their lack of inhibition hasn't increased their quality of life.

to me, having no conscience is something not admirable and I would never want to be in the same group of people as psychopaths. Having a conscience shows you are human and have some kind of moral. That makes you human and different from the animals (even though they have their own intelligence and can be very loving too). Suicide must come from true conviction. If you have doubts about it, don't do it. Also most psychopaths don't commit suicide so conscience is only one reason for doing it or not doing it. In some situations, conscience actually makes people risk their lives for others or killing themselves if someone is better off by it.

 

[Anarchy]

to me, having no conscience is something not admirable and I would never want to be in the same group of people as psychopaths. Having a conscience shows you are human and have some kind of moral. That makes you human and different from the animals (even though they have their own intelligence and can be very loving too). Suicide must come from true conviction. If you have doubts about it, don't do it. Also most psychopaths don't commit suicide so conscience is only one reason for doing it or not doing it. In some situations, conscience actually makes people risk their lives for others or killing themselves if someone is better off by it.

1. Humans are animals
2. People without a conscience are human

 

[creatureoflight]

1. Humans are animals
2. People without a conscience are human

Sure humans are animals, however you never see a chimp inventing new drugs or a lion hunting with a bow and arrow, so there are some differences.
Sure psychopaths are human, but they lack a conscience which again makes them different from most humans and not in a good way

 

[Anarchy]

Sure humans are animals, however you never see a chimp inventing new drugs or a lion hunting with a bow and arrow, so there are some differences.
Sure psychopaths are human, but they lack a conscience which again makes them different from most humans and not in a good way

I'm pretty sure that empathy isn't an obstacle for chimps to invent drugs, rather, lack of the required skills/'intelligence' etc. So, it seems that that's the main thing that sets humans and other species of animals apart, not empathy. Besides, some other species have empathy, and animals don't generally kill for fun, which some humans do.
As for whether psychopaths are good or bad, well...the whole notion of good and bad is subjective. Most psychopaths still have empathy, just a different sense to everyone else.
Personally, I would prefer to interact with a psychopath than a 'morally good' person, because I think that a lot of people who stick by a moral code seem to be just as emotionally detatched to others as psychopaths, and are only nice to others because of their moral code. Yeah, that's probably not how it is, but is sure seems that way when you have people condeming people for their suicidality because it goes against their morals, and the like.
But I can see why the typical person would dislike psychopaths. They don't follow the moral code of society.

 

[creatureoflight]

I'm pretty sure that empathy isn't an obstacle for chimps to invent drugs, rather, lack of the required skills/'intelligence' etc. So, it seems that that's the main thing that sets humans and other species of animals apart, not empathy. Besides, some other species have empathy, and animals don't generally kill for fun, which some humans do.
As for whether psychopaths are good or bad, well...the whole notion of good and bad is subjective. Most psychopaths still have empathy, just a different sense to everyone else.
Personally, I would prefer to interact with a psychopath than a 'morally good' person, because I think that a lot of people who stick by a moral code seem to be just as emotionally detatched to others as psychopaths, and are only nice to others because of their moral code. Yeah, that's probably not how it is, but is sure seems that way when you have people condeming people for their suicidality because it goes against their morals, and the like.
But I can see why the typical person would dislike psychopaths. They don't follow the moral code of society.

Well, if you prefer to interact with psychopaths compared to other people, why don't you try it out? The risk of being murdered, raped or worse is high with many of them, so you know the risk. I am of course talking only about violent psychopaths with no empathy, not all of them are like that.
Of course morals are subjective, but you can't bend them to the point of ridiculousness. That's why people do evil things: they know that what they're doing is wrong, but they rationalize their behavior and find an excuse for it.
Honestly, to me 'Morals are subjective' isn't even an argument. Then everyone could rape and pillage right and left and if confronted with their behaviour they would say: So what?! Morals are subjective! And my morals say I can do so! Certainly morals vary from culture to culture but all to a reasonable degree. No culture allows for killing humans without any punishment at all, for rape and for other dreadful things human do.

 

[Anarchy]

Well, if you prefer to interact with psychopaths compared to other people, why don't you try it out? The risk of being murdered, raped or worse is high with many of them, so you know the risk. I am of course talking only about violent psychopaths with no empathy, not all of them are like that.
Of course morals are subjective, but you can't bend them to the point of ridiculousness. That's why people do evil things: they know that what they're doing is wrong, but they rationalize their behavior and find an excuse for it.

Some people don't think that their behaviour is wrong, because some people have a different sense of morals entirely.
Sure, the general moral code that most people believe in can't be bent, but some people have a different moral code, or none at all.
There are many criminals etc who don't try to excuse their behaviour because they see nothing wrong with it, or because they don't believe in right and wrong entirely.
For the record, I would be murdered if I had the choice.

 

[Rollo]

Certainly morals vary from culture to culture but all to a reasonable degree. No culture allows for killing humans without any punishment at all, for rape and for other dreadful things human do.

But even contemporary cultures themselves kill humans for violating taboo. Like dealing drugs, abandoning religion or homosexuality. And non-contemporary cultures (nearly all cultures from way before to about 150-200 years ago) had slavery. Slaves were killed, raped, whatever. No punishment whatsoever.

 

[creatureoflight]

But even contemporary cultures themselves kill humans for violating taboo. Like dealing drugs, abandoning religion or homosexuality. And non-contemporary cultures (nearly all cultures from way before to about 150-200 years ago) had slavery. Slaves were killed, raped, whatever. No punishment whatsoever.

Yes, but no culture allows for the general killing of people as you please and right and left. There are certain rules and cases where 'it's alright' according to their morals

 

[Rollo]

Yes, but no culture allows for the general killing of people as you please and right and left. There are certain rules and cases where 'it's alright' according to their morals

Exactly but there is no 'reasonable degree' here - there's just whatever constitute their morals. Of course no culture ever allowed it's members to be freely killed. Just like no gang will allow it's members to kill other members. But outside of culture - quite different standards. Back in the day, the standard was pillage and slavery.