They do finish things but not in the way non psychopaths might. Shipman was a drug addict before he finished med school. He was able to forge documentation in order to get his drugs from the system. I doubt he would get through medical school today.....Many psychopaths are highly intelligent and manage to gain qualifications. They are also extremely good at manipulation and lying. They fixate. On prostitutes for instance; or certain kinds of people that may be marginalised and therefore perceived as 'easier' to victimise. Also who demonstrate the superiority of the psychopath; to the psychopath. "They are (dirty,stupid, old, ugly, human) so they deserve to die". Thus the psychopath justifies his/her actions. I know but it is interesting just how many of these people do or have exhibited psychopathic traits and behaviours, don't you think? I have listed certain people who have exhibited certain psychopathic traits; most of whom are now dead or in prison. I have researched psychopathy and the behaviours and traits that are common to the 'condition' and drawn a conclusion based on reported and demonstrated behaviours of the people I've listed. Short of having the case notes of each individual I've mentioned I'm not sure what else I could do. I wouldn't mind placing a bet that most of the ones mentioned lie somewhere on the psychopathic scale. And I'm not arguing that psychopaths should be kept on a leash. Others have argued that that's what I'm arguing...I am arguing that psychopathy should be taken as seriously as schizophrenia or bipolarism, enabling more research to done in order to better understand the 'condition' and possibly prevent psychopaths from acting on their impulses and causing harm to others and themselves because I am convinced that they can't help themselves at least not without some serious intervention from a third party. I'm arguing that we should all be more aware of the behaviours and traits exhibited by psychopaths in order to recognise when they are at their most dangerous. I'm also arguing that labeling such people as 'psychotic little shits' and casting them on the rubbish heap of history does not absolve the rest of us from some responsiblility especially by deliberately keeping ourselves ignorant. It amazes me how humans love to study predatory animals such as lions, tigers and sharks but when it comes to humans, particularly those who are percieved to do 'bad things' (and I mean the 'worst of the worst' in the arbitrary moral terms that everyone gets so hot under the collar about) but then seem quite hapy to label perpetrators of such as 'evil' without even blinking an eye. Presumably because it makes the rest of us who do not do such things 'good'??? Is a shark evil for eating fluffy seals and cute penguins? Is a lioness abominable because it hunts down the elegant gazele? A tiger heinous because it eats a new born fawn? No they are hunters seeking out victims and killing them. Can we, using all the studies we have, predict some of their predatory behaviours? Why, yes; yes we can. That doesn't render them entirely predicatable of course they are after all wild animals but our study has helped in our understanding of predatory behaviour. Sharks, lions and tigers are not 'evil', they are not just ruthless killing machines.... they do what they do in order to survive.....well you get my gist, I hope? Make the connections?