The first paragraph was what I was trying to explain in an indirect way while directly sticking on to the point that they can think about their morality.
I am not saying that in general they will try to find loopholes to make what they have done sound like a noble thing, just that sometimes they might come to a point in which they think about, yet still don't care unless it benefits them.
Third paragraph I completely agree with. I don't know if saying there are different "types" of sociopathy is accurate, but there are definetly certain groups of sociopath that believe different things from other sociopaths like you explained.
For example. What if a sociopath is told he is a sociopath, diagnosed with it, and accepts to being a sociopath? Wouldn't they think about such things that make them sociopaths, including their morality? Not that they would care much about it, yet would think about it?
In short, I think it's possible for a sociopath to think about their morality, yet not really care much or believe they should be positive in morality. I could be wrong, in which I would like for you to show me why (I'd like more knowledge on the subject and welcome your opposing thought on my thought on the matter).
Oh no, this is not an argument. I was just stating the subject matter.
It IS possible for a sociopath to think of morality in many contexts within their lives but as far as seriously considering morality or attaching any importance to the morality of their decisions, their sociopathy inhibits this function. They're simply unable to seriously care about the morality of their actions. They completely lack empathy for anyone but themselves, so a question of morality would be trivial and nearly meaningless to them. People are their pawns and they do what benefits them.
In a way, a more intelligent sociopath would be the most rational human being you'd meet, but at the same time, the behaviors of a sociopath (using others, manipulation, being purely out for their own gain with little regard to the feelings of others if said others can't benefit them) are just unacceptable within a society built on principles of cooperation and caring for one another (aside from competition and other various values).
Their concepts of morality only apply to their lives if they would benefit from acting in a moral nature, more so than acting in an immoral nature. This makes it necessary for them to know what is commonly accepted as moral and asses such subjects but in reality, they don't give a fuck about it unless it benefits them.
No worries, I didn't see this as an argument, just a calm rational discussion.
Yeah, that's what I meant by the whole morality thing, being able to think about it, not in any way that would make them want to become more moral, though.
I see what you're coming from. Thanks for replying.
Is it normal for a person to kill someone and have no remorse?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
The first paragraph was what I was trying to explain in an indirect way while directly sticking on to the point that they can think about their morality.
I am not saying that in general they will try to find loopholes to make what they have done sound like a noble thing, just that sometimes they might come to a point in which they think about, yet still don't care unless it benefits them.
Third paragraph I completely agree with. I don't know if saying there are different "types" of sociopathy is accurate, but there are definetly certain groups of sociopath that believe different things from other sociopaths like you explained.
For example. What if a sociopath is told he is a sociopath, diagnosed with it, and accepts to being a sociopath? Wouldn't they think about such things that make them sociopaths, including their morality? Not that they would care much about it, yet would think about it?
In short, I think it's possible for a sociopath to think about their morality, yet not really care much or believe they should be positive in morality. I could be wrong, in which I would like for you to show me why (I'd like more knowledge on the subject and welcome your opposing thought on my thought on the matter).
--
NeuroNeptunian
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Oh no, this is not an argument. I was just stating the subject matter.
It IS possible for a sociopath to think of morality in many contexts within their lives but as far as seriously considering morality or attaching any importance to the morality of their decisions, their sociopathy inhibits this function. They're simply unable to seriously care about the morality of their actions. They completely lack empathy for anyone but themselves, so a question of morality would be trivial and nearly meaningless to them. People are their pawns and they do what benefits them.
In a way, a more intelligent sociopath would be the most rational human being you'd meet, but at the same time, the behaviors of a sociopath (using others, manipulation, being purely out for their own gain with little regard to the feelings of others if said others can't benefit them) are just unacceptable within a society built on principles of cooperation and caring for one another (aside from competition and other various values).
Their concepts of morality only apply to their lives if they would benefit from acting in a moral nature, more so than acting in an immoral nature. This makes it necessary for them to know what is commonly accepted as moral and asses such subjects but in reality, they don't give a fuck about it unless it benefits them.
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
No worries, I didn't see this as an argument, just a calm rational discussion.
Yeah, that's what I meant by the whole morality thing, being able to think about it, not in any way that would make them want to become more moral, though.
I see what you're coming from. Thanks for replying.