Psychopaths (Adult and Otherwise)

39%

36% which is higher than I thought!

Though your conscience is in the right place you also have a pragmatic streak and generally aren’t afraid to do your own dirty work! You’re no shrinking violet - but no daredevil either. You generally have little trouble seeing things from another person’s perspective but, at the same time, are no pushover. ‘Everything in moderation – including moderation’ might sum up your approach to life.

Even if you only score 15%, it means if you took your personality and chopped it into 100 equal pieces with a cleaver, then sorted the pieces into two piles, you'd end up with a little heap of 15 raw chunks of pure psychopathology. That sounds very worrisome.

ha i scored 3%

100%

jk 33%

^ psychopath move

30%

what are you guys agreeing with? i hope it was just the roller coasters!

Fallon says he'd prob be a lot worse if hadn't had such a cushy life; it's nature x nurture. But also, right off, makes this other major point:
You’re right that there are a lot of definitions of psychopathy, and there isn’t one governing set of symptoms that point to it. If you look to the DSM-5 [ED: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders] psychopathy doesn’t exist, and if I asked my psychiatrist friends they’d agree with that assessment. In large part, that’s because many of the traits that characterize a psychopath — things like narcissism, sadism, anti-social behavior — appear in other disorders. So there isn’t a clean set of defining traits we can look to and come up with a diagnostic criteria. Really, that’s how much of psychiatry has turned out to be: we don’t have categorical answers, because there’s much more dimensionality to these conditions.
Third point is, "Stop being an asshole." Even if it's just to see if you can do it (as he claims he's doing).

24% on this one.

There is another test which is much more interesting, and measure primary and secondary psychopathic traits. It is the Levenson scale, and is here: http://personality-testing.info/tests/LSRP.php

Took it recently and scored, iirc, over 24% of respondents for primary psychopathy (which is thankfully low), and over 85% of respondents for secondary psychopathy (which is very high). I'm pretty clearly not a psychopath, though, seeing as I spend half my life torturing myself with guilt and self-hatred.

*measureS

i also scored 36%. i'm fine with stepping over people to reach my goals. n.b. it didn't say 'fuck people over'.

9%

ha I had to ponder the semantics of "stepping over" as well

Well shit, 42%

I win?

*crosses self*

21%

I scored 24%, but I think this is higher than it would have been partly because my non-psychopathic self-doubt and cautiousness compelled me to answer 'slightly disagree' rather than 'strongly disagree' to most of the questions.

YOUR SCORE 42%
Though your conscience is in the right place you also have a pragmatic streak and generally aren’t afraid to do your own dirty work! You’re no shrinking violet - but no daredevil either. You generally have little trouble seeing things from another person’s perspective but, at the same time, are no pushover. ‘Everything in moderation – including moderation’ might sum up your approach to life.

61% lol. You all are too nice. Got the same blurb as sarahell though.

48%. But I also did it a week or so ago and got 30-something, so Xmas obviously made me psychotic.

9%, but some of that's just because I'm a wimp.

12%

what are you guys agreeing with? i hope it was just the roller coasters!

"I like rollercoasters, and have no reaction to seeing animals in pain."

24%. Rollercoasters, and fuckups are always someone else's fault.

42%. should I, or more importantly, the people around me be worried?

27%, same answers as ledge

Twitter tells me that every hardcore fashion person who took this test got 70 per cent and they were proud of their scores.

I got 42, but my dad was/sister is a total sociopath, so could have been worse.

18% - I think I must be feeling particularly guilty about causing fuckups today.

Longer test that emil.y posted is slightly more interesting.

You score (1) for primary psychopathy was higher than 0% of people who have taken this test.
You score (3.3) for secondary psychopathy was higher than 81.09% of people who have taken this test.

Primary psychopathy was described as the usual lack of empthay/thrill-seeking etc but secondary was described thusly:

Secondary psychopathy is the antisocial aspects of psychopathy; rule breaking and a lack of effort towards socially rewarded behavior.

^^^Kind of disregards that there might be other aspects of "rule breaking" and "lack of effort towards socially rewarded behaviour" than just psychopathy? (e.g. rules and rewards which are impossible to follow or attain due to other (societal) pressure?) e.g. if the rule one is breaking is "whites only at the lunch counter" then breaking that rule is not evidence of psychopathy, but its exact opposite, a sense of justice or fairness or indeed empathy?

You score (1.2) for primary psychopathy was higher than 5.51% of people who have taken this test.
You score (2.6) for secondary psychopathy was higher than 54% of people who have taken this test.

Yep - these psychological tests usually make subtle and not-so-subtle accommodations to conservative social conventions.

See, for a moment there I was worried that I was a normal person. Phew!!!

You score for primary psychopathy was higher than 5.51% of people who have taken this test.

You score for secondary psychopathy was higher than 71.45% of people who have taken this test.

ILX0rs trending nice but iconoclastic IMO

this is a right load of old bollocks imo

Psychology is 1/2 bollocks, 1/4 science and 1/4 fair guesses, providing 3/4 entertainment.

Curmudgeon test for NV incoming.

oh i know what my curmudgeon rating is don't worry ;-)

i think i really wanted to examine the current vogue for "spot the psychopath" which to the best of my understanding is still pretty freakin contentious amongst the pyschology community but i'm still here in parental limbo and didn't think i had the brainpower to tease that one out

Possibly people are looking for a way to spot someone like Jimmy Savile before they do any actual damage.

psychopathy is a pseudo-scientific theory useful for plugging the holes left by the categorical collapse of evil

Or a concept to help people convince themselves that they're normal? "Of course I think about slashing the tyres of my boss's car, but I wouldn't actually do it, therefore I'm not really a psychopath"

idk if anything it's too inclusionary, not exclusionary "for there is not a just man on earth, that does good, and sins not."

has evil as a concept collapsed? obv not amongst people as a whole but i accept we're not thinking about that strictly. still, isn't evil still ascribed as a descriptor to actions even among people who wd shy away from describing other humans as evil in themselves?

i feel like the idea of psychopathy tries to plug a hole that isn't the shape we think it is

it's just that post determinism, esp in psycho-pharmeceutical world, evil is no longer causal - maybe descriptive - and we still need (catharsis-like) an explanation for evil. if it isn't an evil person then it's a psychopathic mind. maybe.

39% psycho

eg 'how can a wealthy man steal from the widow + orphan?' if before it was due to the evil inclination now it is bc of neuro atypical brain chemistry.

oh yeah i think many people crave explanations - wd bracket off the whole determinism argument, maybe too abstruse for general use - more importantly perhaps many people crave totalizing worldviews - psychopathy, like paedophilia, saves a little bit of hate for the sinner but disguises it as the limits of "treatability"

Would people prefer a simple but incorrect explanation that allowed them to sleep at night, or a complex but as far as possible correct explanation that kept them awake with worry? I suspect that given enough stress and pressure, any one of us could become sociopathic, drawing a line in the sand where everyone else is on the other side and 'fair game' for abuse. On the other hand, there is still a degree of choice: that people choose to behave badly towards others. Or a least it would be nice to believe that, even if it couldn't be proved.

which explanation allows one to sleep better at night?

it's a problem to talk about "people" in that generalized way, i guess, as well as to distinguish between what we want to believe, choose to believe and happen to believe.

i think i choose to not believe in a scorecard approach to anticipating behaviour but that doesn't mean the scorecard mightn't have practical applications, i guess - altho what you do with the knowledge that Person A might commit crimes before they've committed them, well, i'm buggered if i know.