Don't make the mistake of assuming the experiences of others. Go and watch the documentary, there's obviously more information on the subject gleaned by experts as their understanding of the condition grows. If you claim that their emotions tend to be self-serving or about their needs or wants with less consideration for others then in effect you are saying that they cannot empathize as empathy is the opposite of what you describe. I think you should go back and re-read my previous post as you either didn't read the edit or didn't understand it. Having friends does not mean one doesn't mimic emotion, it doesn't mean one is experiencing a depth of emotion which is why professional refer to the disconnect between their responses and what they are experiencing, the 'shallow effect'. They simply do not experience emotion the same way that other's do. What you are doing is taking your own personal experiences and projecting them unto the subject in general as well as believing those subjective experiences amounts to objective expertise, so all I can tell you is to watch the documentary as it deals with the emotional state of the psychopath/sociopath. You understand some aspects of the condition but not others which is why we bother discussing them at all, to learn something new on the subject (ie: the OP). And perhaps read this. Page 323 'Emotion in the Psychopath': http://dionysus.psych.wisc.edu/Lit/Articles/PatrickC1994a.pdf You cannot posit that slave owners were sociopaths unless you want to say that the whole culture suffered from psychopathy. In other words you are diagnosing a cultural social structure. Would you say all of Germany was psychopathic? All of Cambodia? There are other dynamics that work when one refers to a cultural social structure where sociopathic traits can rise and dominate but you cannot retroactively call slave owners sociopaths as if you were diagnosing them as individuals who were acting contrary to their social and cultural environment.