Your opinion

[Hydraboss]

There is a real lack of empathy in your reply. Ergo...

And? In business, who gives a shit about empathy? Unless of course you're a counsellor.

[Hydraboss]

Says the guy with an economic 8.38...

Does'nt that put you in the category of the likes of General Augusto Pinochet???

Not that I advocate for psychopath's running anything...

Hmmm. Couldn't find Pinochet, but my "score" puts me about as "facist" as Harper, and to the "right" somewhere between Gordon Brown and George Bush.

The problem with the term "psychopath" as it's being used in this thread, is the assumption that ALL executives that are successful as psychos. That is the equivalent of me calling all Occupy-idiots "mentally retarded". Why don't we have a lengthly discussion as to whether we should test for mental retardation before people are allowed to protest?

[Guest Manny]

And? In business, who gives a shit about empathy? Unless of course you're a counsellor.

See the pope, "Moral economics"

[Hydraboss]

See the pope, "Moral economics"

Sorry, but I have no interest in seeing the pope. And he would likely have no interest in me (I'm too old to be his type)

[Michael Hardner]

Saw him LIVE at Vatican City, Palm Sunday 1981 !

[Guest Manny]

Sorry, but I have no interest in seeing the pope. And he would likely have no interest in me (I'm too old to be his type)

Of course not, I wouldn't expect you to be at all interested in the concept of moral economics. As far as the pope goes, 'm no avid admirer but as the saying goes, give the devil his due. When someone is right, they're right, and it is the solution for our times, to "go forward". Want to restore consumer confidence? This is what the people want.

[dre]

like addiction or fetal alcohol syndrome or being gay

:lol:

[TimG]

like addiction or fetal alcohol syndrome or being gay

:lol:

Why don't you provide an explanation for why psychopathy is any different than the above? All of them are a result of brain abnormalities that have genetic and environmental factors. The only difference is how society reacts to the abnormalities. I would love you hear your convoluted rational for dividing brain abnormalities into 'abnormalities we must accommodate' and 'abnormalities we must work to eradicate'. Edited December 29, 2011 by TimG

[jacee]

Why don't you provide an explanation for why psychopathy is any different than the above? All of them are a result of brain abnormalities that have genetic and environmental factors. The only difference is how society reacts to the abnormalities. I would love you hear your convoluted rational for dividing brain abnormalities into 'abnormalities we must accommodate' and 'abnormalities we must work to eradicate'.

The issue of course, would be harm to others. I doubt we'll be "eradicating" psychopathy any time soon but society (eg, the economy) can sure be better protected from them if corporate boards become better educated about the risks and costs of hiring them.

http://m.theaustralian.com.au/news/snakes-in-suits-when-psychopaths-go-to-work/story-e6frg8no-1111112236244

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/4057771.stm

[TimG]

The issue of course, would be harm to others.

Gays are the only ones in my list of 'abnormals' which do no harm to others. OTOH, the prisons are filled with addicts and FAS people so I would argue that they, as a group, do more harm than psychopaths. Yet we are told that addicts and FAS are victims of a disease and not cupable for their actions. It seems to me the exact same argument applies to psychopaths.

IOW - you have not answered my question: how do you distinguish between 'abnormalities (that cause harm to others) which we must accommodate' and 'abnormalities (that cause harm to others) which we must work to eradicate'?

Edited December 29, 2011 by TimG

[Guest Manny]

Yet we are told that addicts and FAS are victims of a disease and not cupable for their actions. It seems to me the exact same argument applies to psychopaths.

The difference comes down to whether they can be rehabilitated or not, reintroduced into society and if so, how. But we ("normal" society) still need to be protected from them, regardless of the classification you seek.

[cybercoma]

The point is you have to ask yourself is if the best system for humanity is one that promotes and benefits those who are completely incapable of empathy and compassion, like psychopaths.

[Guest Manny]

The point is you have to ask yourself is if the best system for humanity is one that promotes and benefits those who are completely incapable of empathy and compassion, like psychopaths.

That is the current dilemma but possible has ever been thus. Those who seek power through leadership are often the most ruthless and conniving and thereby gain success.

What's good is that this is now becoming an issue of social awareness. We need to identify this as a big part of our problem. The definition of "success" must be reconsidered. That is the road to a future morality.

[TimG]

The difference comes down to whether they can be rehabilitated or not, reintroduced into society and if so, how. But we ("normal" society) still need to be protected from them, regardless of the classification you seek.

Yet suffering from addiction or FAS is commonly used as a excuse for lesser sentances (i.e. protection of society is of no concern when it comes to sentencing today). Are you arguing that we should be doing more to protect society from the sourge of addicts and FAS people?

[TimG]

The point is you have to ask yourself is if the best system for humanity is one that promotes and benefits those who are completely incapable of empathy and compassion, like psychopaths.

Psychopaths go where the money is. If you don't like the fact that business is a place to make money then I suggest you look at emigrating to Cuba or North Korea where the psychopaths work for the government because that is where the money is. Do you really believe that the 'system' has anything to do with it?

I see this entire 'pychopaths in business' narrative as yet another 'alternate reality' created by the left to rationalize their hatred/fear of business.

Edited December 29, 2011 by TimG

[cybercoma]

Psychopaths go where the money is. If you don't like the fact that business is a place to make money then I suggest you look at emigrating to Cuba or North Korea where the psychopaths work for the government because that is where the money is. Do you really believe that the 'system' has anything to do with it?

I see this entire 'pychopaths in business' narrative as yet another 'alternate reality' created by the left to rationalize their hatred/fear of business.

Yet another strawman argument. Apparently, I don't like the fact that business is a place to make money.

Let me know when you're ready to actually discuss the things I say, rather than the fantasies you construct and knock down.

[TimG]

Yet another strawman argument. Apparently, I don't like the fact that business is a place to make money.

You are the one that said:

"The point is you have to ask yourself is if the best system for humanity is one that promotes and benefits those who are completely incapable of empathy and compassion"

My response is there is nothing in the nature of business that promotes and benefits pychopaths. This is 'false reality' construct created by the left.

[cybercoma]

The doctor that actually created the Psychopathy Checklist (PCL-R) disagrees with you. I think I'll take his opinion about psychopaths over yours.

http://www.amazon.ca/Snakes-Suits-When-Psychopaths-Work/dp/0060837721

[TimG]

The doctor that actually created the Psychopathy Checklist (PCL-R) disagrees with you.

Once again you are assuming a causal relationship when you have no rational reason to believe there is one. What that book appears to describe psychopaths as master manipulators that will exploit ANY system for personal gain. In our society the "system" is largely based on private enterprise so it comes a no surprise to find that psychopaths manipulate it. In different societies those same psychopaths would still be manipulating the system (e.g. become communist party loyalists) for personal gain. I can see no evidence that the private enterprise system is "better" for psychopaths. Seems to me psychopaths would much rather work in a secretive police state where they had no fear of being found out by a free press and could simply arrange for the murder of inconvenient people.

The bottom line: when you claim there is some link between psychopaths and corporations you are simply constructing a false reality to validates your beliefs.

Edited December 30, 2011 by TimG

[eyeball]

So, do you think the "testing" of private citizens is appropriate? I thought that you were against "jack boot" tactics. Guess you're no better than Mein Herr Harper, eh?

Maybe you're missing the point that people might also challenge themselves to become better human beings.

That said, I suppose this test could just as easily be used by a fascist to hone their skills.

[eyeball]

Ironically - the lefty creed would not only require that psychopathy be treated as a mental illness - it would then qualify for employement equity treatment! IOW - corporations would be legally required to hire and promote psychopaths based on their representation in the community.

In a vein similar to the one I left with Hydraboss, I think a lot of lefties would try to be better human beings to the people around them whereas a rightie would deny there was any need to.

In the meantime, pointing out the traits that distinguish executive-class ass-holes from decent working people is fair game, take Kevin O'Leary for example...

[TimG]

In a vein similar to the one I left with Hydraboss, I think a lot of lefties would try to be better human beings to the people around them whereas a rightie would deny there was any need to.

I would say a lot of lefties put great stock in pretending to be better human beings by jumping on various silly bandwagons with no thought to the long term consequences.

[waldo]

Why is psychopathy any different than any other 'behavoir disorder' like addiction or fetal alcohol syndrome or being gay?

Why don't you provide an explanation for why psychopathy is any different than the above? All of them are a result of brain abnormalities that have genetic and environmental factors.

Gays are the only ones in my list of 'abnormals' which do no harm to others.

IOW - you have not answered my question: how do you distinguish between 'abnormalities (that cause harm to others) which we must accommodate' and 'abnormalities (that cause harm to others) which we must work to eradicate'?

oh... you just never know what will pop out of a thread! So, being gay is a... behaviour disorder. So, being gay is a result of a... brain abnormality. So, being gay is genetic... no... wait... it's environmental... which one, which one - so confusing... which one, which one - hey TimG? Pick one... which one, which one... or both? Nature, nuture, nature nature... which one, which one, hey TimG?

[eyeball]

Yet suffering from addiction or FAS is commonly used as a excuse for lesser sentances (i.e. protection of society is of no concern when it comes to sentencing today). Are you arguing that we should be doing more to protect society from the sourge of addicts and FAS people?

That FAS sufferers have to hope that being poisoned in the womb might garner some sympathy from society underscores just how deeply psychopathic so much of it really is.

A scourge of poisoned babies? That's just plain sick.

[TimG]

That FAS sufferers have to hope that being poisoned in the womb might garner some sympathy from society underscores just how deeply psychopathic so much of it really is.

How do you know that psychopathy is a not result of some unidentified poisoning in the womb too? Wouldn't they deserve as much sympathy? What is sick is the presumption that psychopathy is somehow different than other brain abnomalities.