Isn't assad the dictator of Syria a psychopath

R

river

I would that the analysis, psychologically, would be correct

Is there other evidence that a psychopath has been in power in the world in the last 20 yrs?
 
Throughout history there have been leaders with complete authority willing to do anything to retain power. They may or may not have been psychopaths, as opposed to cold blooded killers.
 
mathman said:
Throughout history there have been leaders with complete authority willing to do anything to retain power. They may or may not have been psychopaths, as opposed to cold blooded killers.
Click to expand...

yet the psychological evidence is that they are psychopaths

to kill their own people for power seems to be a lack of empathy
 
river said:
to kill their own people for power seems to be a lack of empathy
Click to expand...
They don't think of them as "their own people." There are tremendous ethnic and/or religious rivalries in those places. If the despot is a member of one group, he'll happily kill off all the members of all the other groups and consider it a great accomplishment.

After all, that's how Hitler worked, the quintessential "evil leader." He was reluctant to kill people he (mistakenly) regarded as Aryans, even in conquered countries like Denmark. But he regarded Jews, Gypsies and Slavs as disposable animals.

But another dimension of this is simply class rivalry. It's been a common theme since the Bronze Age, when the first large concentrations of wealth could be created, that the wealthy people did not regard the poor people as "their own people."

This is why so many Americans are uneasy with the prospect of electing a man who would be the richest president since George Washington (who was astoundingly wealthy). I don't know how many of them could put it into words, or even ponder it consciously, but I'm sure that deep down inside they're worried that a wealthy leader would not care very much about their fate. Most of our presidents have been successful and prosperous, but not so prosperous that they felt a disconnection from their constituents.

We've coined the term "limousine liberal" for people like the Kennedys, who are rich but still regard us all as "their own people." (Or as a cynic might say, "they do an incredibly good simulation of somebody who cares." :)) The fact that we need a name for it indicates that it's not a common phenomenon.
 
Isn't Netaniahu, the prime minister of Israel a psychopath? No? Neither is Assad.
 
mathman said:
I need a precise definition of "psychopath", but I assume it is a form of insanity.
Click to expand...
Psychiatrists never diagnose patients as psychopaths, so the term is not very precise. And of course when you use the phrase "not very precise" in regard to the soft science of psychology, you're really out in the middle of nowhere.

Nonetheless, a layman's definition would require that most of these criteria be met:
  • Shallow emotions, particularly fear
  • High tolerance for stress
  • No feeling of empathy for other humans (not clear whether this includes family since, as I have noted before, our ability to feel empathy for people outside our family is not natural at all, but a reasoned and learned override of our natural Paleolithic instinct to distrust other tribes)
  • Egocentricity
  • Impulsiveness
  • Excellent social skills, but used to fool and manipulate other people through charm, to the extent of parasitism
Again, please note that a psychopath may simply be a human who, for one reason or another, never developed the overlay of civilized behavior that is not natural to our species. As I have noted before, one would expect a Paleolithic human to be kind and caring to his own family because in the Paleolithic Era it was difficult for a lone human to survive. Nonetheless, it is much easier today and today (apparently) psychopaths are just as hard on their families as on the rest of us. So it may be that there were psychopaths in the Stone Age who treated their own people kindly because it was for their own benefit, not because they liked them.
 
Fraggle Rock

Psychiatrists never diagnose patients as psychopaths
Click to expand...

the reason they don't is because legally they can't

it was proposed that a distinction should be made , so as that a psychopath is distinguish from a sociopath . ( because there is a difference , a psychopath cannot be changed , they have tried and nothing works )

however , if I remember right , this was rejected

this is in the site I mentioned a couple of posts ago
 
youreyes said:
The President [Bill Clinton] who had the lowest unemployment?
Click to expand...
Clinton hardly stands out as a psychopath in the gallery of U.S. presidents. He didn't start any wars, for example. His body count is pretty much limited to the atrocities at Ruby Ridge and Waco.

Give reference to Bush junior.
Click to expand...
He's already been diagnosed with pre-senile dementia: every time he opened his mouth something came out which proved that all of his neurons were no longer firing in tandem. He was much more intelligent and articulate as governor of Texas, I've seen interviews.

So he's mentally ill, but not psychopathic. I'm sure the reason nobody was willing to stand before the entire nation and state that he was no longer fit for duty... was the man who was in line to take over. The guy who shot his own buddy in the face!
 
For the most part , it's not the president that is the psychopath, although he does give the final command

It is the people behind him and the people he does business with who could be psychopaths
 
river said:
For the most part , it's not the president that is the psychopath, although he does give the final command

It is the people behind him and the people he does business with who could be psychopaths
Click to expand...

Crazies nudge themselves into all sorts of odd places in society. One is the president, and then sweepy too. Crazy.
 
kx000 said:
Crazies nudge themselves into all sorts of odd places in society. One is the president, and then sweepy too. Crazy.
Click to expand...

Crazies nudge themselves into religion as well . the combination of politics and religion melding together is NOT good
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top