Sociopathic disregard for social norms

Previously, aspie disregard for social norms and schizoid disregard for social norms.

Because there is ambiguity in the term, I’ll define the term explicitly as I prefer to use it: Sociopathy is the combination of psychopathy (the absence of emotional sympathy) with Machiavellianism (natural talent in sociopolitical navigation). Due to the latter it is typically associated with higher IQ, particularly verbal IQ. Sociopaths are social engineers due to a natural cynicism and by compulsive people watching, rather than by academic study or training.

It is also important to understand the organization, power centers, and soul – to the extent that’s not a contradiction in terms – of the bureaucracy you are stuck in. Example, for Gulf War One, the Army cast a very wide net to drag in a shitload of captains from all over creation to fill up certain units in Special Operations Command, one of those captains being a very eager to get to the war me. (Note, here, that SOCOM is amazingly captain heavy; yes, you will pick up trash and cut grass as an officer there.) About thirty or forty such captains, in the 96th CA Battalion (Civil Affairs. Sounds pogue, but is overwhelmingly combat arms and surprisingly casualty intensive), ended up on folding cots and hammocks in various company supply rooms. Some others rented apartments on short leases. I, instead, identified the proper office, went there, and talked the clerk-presiding into giving me a free furnished set of bachelor officer quarters. I was also, via understanding of how the system worked, the only captain to escape from USAREC to get to the war. I don’t honestly know if this is something mostly learned or something innate, but I am pretty sure that, if you don’t study the system you’re stuck in, any innate talent for manipulating it will be lost.

Tom Kratman
Comment on Subtraits of reliability

Sociopaths are probably the most interesting case that I’ve thought about so far, regarding social mores. Clearly, they are aware of the rules (unlike aspies) and quite content to exploit and hack them (unlike schizoids), but I don’t believe they particularly care about them. To demonstrate by contrast, there’s a detachment that you don’t see with neuroticism…

On criticism of technology

In paragraph 1 of the manifesto the Unabomber speaks of “widespread psychological suffering” caused by “The Industrial Revolution and its consequences”. Throughout the manifesto this point is repeated many times, often worded differently using terms like “anxiety” and “depression”, and mostly suggesting disruption of what he calls “the power process” as its cause.

The truth is likely that he was suffering as a result of mental illness, and failed to recognize the cause thereof lay inside himself. Lack of insight in one’s illness is common in persons with mental disorders; the psychiatric report relates of a short period in 1966 when he suspected he might be developing a mental disorder, but apparently lost that insight soon thereafter.

Instead of realizing the true cause of his anxiety and depression he attributed those to technological society. As a logical result, he assumed many more people would be suffering similarly. Hence his notion of “widespread psychological suffering”. From this point on, he employed a rigid type of logic to arrive at the conclusion this widespread suffering could only be stopped by returning to a more primitive form of society without large-scale technology and large-scale organization.

Paul Cooijmans
Comment on the Unabomber’s Manifesto

…or oppositional defiant disorder.

On Oppositional Defiant “Disorder”

Air quotes because it’s really quite adaptive on the individual level, even if society formally disapproves.

ODD is a fixation to a common human behavior I call “conspicuous rule-breaking”. It’s a variant of virtue signalling where a person will flagrantly violate a social or institutional taboo in the view of others to demonstrate their high status. Chicks dig conspicuous rule-breaking because it demonstrates unpredictable wildness (the opposite of slavish predictability), which is why civilization is incompatible with feminism. Men fall into three camps, based on their preferred social style: signalers are impressed and attracted to conspicuous rule-breaking, spergs are offended and repulsed, and small-talkers are just surprised and confused (hence the nervous laughter).

To wrap things up, I made one of my little charts for social retards.



About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Sociopathic disregard for social norms

  1. Santoculto says:

    I don’t think sociopaths lack of emotional empathy or even lack a neurotypical pallet of emotion spectrum. I think they differentiate from psychopaths exactly because they are emotional too but evil. In my view sociopath and psychopath is to nerd and autist. The first ones are neurotypicals (normal range of emotions and emotional capability of response). In second hand, the second ones don’t display normal or expected spectrum of emotions. Basically this differences. I can be wrong no question.

    Sociopaths seems a intersection between borderline disorder and anti-social disorders.

    Both psychopaths and autists try to mimic neurotypical behaviors or typical emotional responses, on avg, of course, because there are different profiles or combinations to both.

    Nerds and sociopaths can’t do that because they are neurotypical at least based on this perspective.

  2. William Willcock says:

    These three strategies might work in different environments. A sociopath will flourish in a position of power. A schizoid in an atomized or as pie environment. An Aspie in a rule filled and small tribe obscure work environment.

    • Akuma says:

      Dear Aeoli,

      Please delete his comments.

      • Aeoli Pera says:

        Both of you explain, here or Skype or gmail. I’ll check back in the morning.

        • Akuma says:

          Dear Aeoli,

          I already explained on skype. MMs domain fight failure is now in my possession in many different forms. After his treachery it’s clear that he is not allowed here. I hope you understand this. I’ll be continuing his work once all the main links to our names are deleted. He had shown hid true colors and needs to be excommunicated from the eden sphere.

        • Akuma says:

          Also, if Kratman is aware of this I’d like to do an interview with him about winning.

        • no says:

          Also, I have nothing to do with the “edenosphere”. I do not want to be commenting here unless it helps other ppl like my comment under “a” below.

          I want to win back our civilization and do the MOST MEANINGFUL actions in line with my ultimate purpose as is possible!!!

          Apologies to everyone that #drama(Much more real than dumb trolling) has sprung up here again. Maybe Ill just have to go full ghost since a psychotic crossfit cultist/alcoholic hallucinogen popping Ufo watcher has taken interest in me and wont let me just leave everyone here alone (aside from the helpful rando comments and blog posts).

          Pyschos gonna psycho.

        • Tom Kratman says:

          I usually have to know and think well of someone before I’ll do an interview. You simply can’t trust people enough anymore to go into one blind.

    • a says:

      Watched whole thing, took notes:

      Killing is actually relatively unnatural to humans(The 98 percent vs the 2 percent sociopaths, psychos, and heros)
      During threats, the amygdela takes over (Assuming you havent been trained) and rational thought is near impossible.
      Mans natural impulse is not to kill an enemy but to posture (Make a huge dominance display) like any other interspecies conflict.
      This meant that before modern training methods- IE even WW2 and Vietnam, the majority of killing was done by very very few ppl.
      It is much easier to kill ppl the further and more abstract they are away
      (Artillery, bombing, machine guns, cause most causulties. In Vietnam think of just how reliant on killing by bombing was)
      How to get ppl to kill- operant conditioning.
      Train ppl, in the most realistic situation possible, as much as possible, until shooting someone is completely natural.
      Afterwards, praise them and give them larger rewards the more they have killed.

      • Lizard King says:

        The trouble seems to be that you can train someone to kill but their mind may not be able to deal with it afterwards. We have all these guys who “benefited” from the modern conditioning techniques but we also have double digits of veterans killing themselves daily. Gubmint makes effective one-use-only soldiers and then dumps them. Sounds about right.

        And on the subject of the 2%…I know one. He absolutely loves killing. Gets sad because he hasn’t killed anyone in a few years. Very good guy. Would give you the shirt off his back. Cares for his tribe. Just loves killing. Sounds like the friend of the guy from the Falklands War in episode 1 who was nice to everyone and was a psychopath.

        • Tom Kratman says:

          I wonder if you can come up with even one day where 10 vets killed themselves, let alone many or indicia of every.

          What you’re describing is sometimes called a “useful sociopath.” He’s perfectly capable of seeing others are human beings of considerable moral worth, but tends to define “human being” quite restrictively.

          • Lizard King says:

            “I wonder if you can come up with even one day where 10 vets killed themselves, let alone many or indicia of every.”

            I’m just going off the VA’s claim of 20 a day. I doubt that it is quite that high but I’m also not a statistician.

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              You have all the free time in the world right now, take a minute to find a good source and then let me know. I’d do it myself but I’m very important.

            • Tom Kratman says:

              Here’s a source that says so:

              Here are the problems: 1) Your statement is more than implying that military service is the cause of the suicides. This seems unlikely since the suicide rate among non vets and vets (excluding active duty) is about the same (actually, non vets – 2000 – 2010 are 20.9 vice the 20 reported in 2014 for vets). 2) Don’t discount the VA’s ability to play around with figures to get increased budgets. (Note, too, that the VA’s budget is almost 4.5 times higher than Germany’s entire defense budget. It is about as large as the combined defense budgets of Germany, about 40 billion US, the UK, not quite 60 billion US, France, about 45 billion, and Italy, 42 billion or so.) 3) Note that most of these guys are over 50, veterans of a peacetime military, and had no experience of killing and, for most of them, little training in the job.

              Now _women_ vets suicide rates are very high, more than five times the female norm. One could surmise many reasons for this.

              So, yes, you seem right about Veteran suicide rates, but the implications are way off.

            • Lizard King says:

              I’m glad that you questioned my statement because now I’ve learned something new today!

              From my own number crunching there appears to be a higher incidence of suicides from veterans than non-veterans. However, it’s close to a 1% difference per capita. Which really isn’t much.

              So, I retract my earlier statement as far as the implications go. That’s why we look into things for ourselves instead of accepting the narrative.


            • Tom Kratman says:

              Oh, and I fucked up that stat, mixing daily alleged rates with per 100k rates. My bad. It’s hard to split the per 100k rates, though, because it includes active service personnel engaged in a fairly druitless war.

  3. Lizard King says:

    Theme song for post! :D

  4. vfm#7634 says:

    Interesting. Based upon what I’ve read here, I’m almost certainly a sociopath.

    In regards to Oppositional Defiant Disorder, I’ve been a conspicuous rule-breaker all my life, but only if I think the “rule” in question doesn’t work for me. If I think they make sense, or suit my purposes, I’ll (usually) abide by them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s