As far as an example of where someone in the past has “wronged” me if hard for me because I do not like to air dirty laundry. But since I have to talk about something, I will go with an incident that occurred within a job that I had. I will not name names or the employer. The supervisor that hired me, unexpectedly passed away. The person below the supervisor that would now be in charge was a not so nice person. Part of the requirement of the job was living in the county of which I would be working. I lived less than 2 miles from the county line in which I was to live. The housing market at the time was absolutely horrible. Since I was less than 2 miles from the county line, I went to someone I knew that had more authority than the individual that was not so nice, and asked them if it would be an issue just to stay where I was for the time being until the housing market got better, since I was going to have to sell a house and buy another one. When the not so nice person found out I went over them, they had an internal investigation done on me and I was eventually demoted. There are more details to the story that I have not covered but since we only have so many words to write about this, I am having to leave a …show more content…
I was so angry over what this other person had done. I was so hurt that someone could be this vindictive and get so much satisfaction from hurting someone. I was treated like a common criminal. A character trait can incline us to be dishonest, deceptive, fraudulent, irresponsible or indifferent to or harmful towards others (Williams and Arrigo, 2012). This person had become all of these. This person became revengeful and went to make me out to be the scapegoat. An attorney that worked at the same location told them what they were doing was not ethically wrong and not right and this attorney was almost fired for standing up for what was right. To this day, I have never forgotten what the attorney did for
Hare used these core factors to develop the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised assessment tool that helps detect psychopathy in people. They developed this theory because psychopathic behavior was thought of as miscellaneous of a topic to be categorized in one or two factors. The four recommended factors proposed by Hare and Neumann are: Interpersonal, Affective, Lifestyle and Antisocial. The first factor, interpersonal consists of superficial charm, manipulation, pathological lying, and a grandiose sense of self-worth. Secondly, the affective factor involves the lack of remorse or guilt, shallow affect, callous and/or lack of empathy, and failure to accept responsibility for own actions. The third factor is lifestyle, which comprises of need for stimulation and/or proneness to boredom, parasitic lifestyle, impulsivity, irresponsibility, unsatisfactory work habits, and lack of realistic long-term goals. Finally the fourth factor is antisocial and contains poor behavioral controls, early behavior problems, juvenile delinquency, criminal versatility, and revocation of conditional release (Hare & Neumann, 2005, p.58-59). According to Hare and Neumann “The 4 psychopathy factors are significantly interrelated, and thus can be comprehensively explained by a single superordinate (that is, psychopathy) factor.” (Hare, R. D., & Neumann, C. S.
The author, Katherine Ramsland, is a forensic psychologist that teaches criminal justice. The purpose of this article is to answer the question of ‘how and why’ a human could have so much anger towards another person. Anthony Meoli holds a BS in criminal justice from Penn State University, a MA in forensic psychology from Argosy University, and a JD from John Marshall Law School. He was interviewed while I was reading this article and answered questions based off of why he was launching this project. His ultimate goal was to find a link between the creative side of their brain and the ability they have to naturally compartmentalize their live. He wants to find out why they are addicted to killing and what draws them towards that need. He
An example of this is a man and his wife are arguing; he becomes enraged and murders his wife in the heat of the disagreement. This man has a clean record; he has never committed a murder or crime of any kind before “Statistical trends would project that he won’t murder again” (Samenow 2). This man is not a “monster,” psychopath, or a freak of nature; he is a normal person who reacts in an entirely wrong way to a hostile and stressful situation. He knew what he was doing was wrong, but he rationalized the crime with his emotions and feelings rather than his morals. The “Evil is in all of us, really, but it’s how it’s expressed” that separates criminals and law abiding citizens (Prattini).
I had just graduated high school and I wasn’t too interested in going to college. My plan was to enlist into the armed forces after high school, but I took things slow and decided I wanted to make a few bucks first. I had applied for Wal-Mart in late May and very much wanted the job. I called frequently to check on the status of my application and eventually they called me in for an interview. The interview itself took around three hours and I didn’t go home until about two in the morning. On June 10th, I got a call from Wal-Mart asking if there was any way possible I could go in the next day for training; I had been hired at Wal-Mart. Training was a fun experience with very fun and amazing people. I got paid 9.50 an hour, while I was in training as an overnight stocker; though my training took place in the day time. I thought that this was going to be and easy job. I have never been so wrong in my life.
While the individual has the ability to do good, they also have the ability to do wrong. Atticus points
However, Glenn and Raine (2014) argue that the emotional deficits characteristic of psychopaths diminish their rational capacity, making them unable to be held accountable for the rash and harmful decisions. Additionally, psychopaths may display knowledge of right and wrong, however their understanding is substantially compromised (Maibom 2005). Therefore, because they cannot understand moral emotions, moral transgressions fail to motivate them and they cannot be held morally responsible for their actions. They treat moral transgressions as equal to conventional transgressions (Levy 2008); to them, they are merely breaking the rules. And although breaking the rules begets consequences, a short attention span prevents psychopaths from anticipating consequences. Nevertheless, say, for example, a psychopath on a different portion of the spectrum is aware of the consequences. In this case, they would be still be indifferent because their feelings of grandeur lead them to believe that they are removed from punishment (Gao, Glenn, Schug, Yang, Raine 2009). For these reasons, many argue that psychopaths should not be held responsible for their behaviors.
The various traits associated with predatory/ serial offending resemble those of a psychopath. These traits include difficulties in processing fear and sadness of others, insensitivity to punishment, lack of empathy, grandiosity, narcissism, superficial charm, lying and manipulation, lack of anxiety, no internalized moral guide, low autonomic nervous
“Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by an inability to form human attachment, aggressive narcissism, and antisocial behavior defined by a constellation of affective, interpersonal and behavioral characteristics, most of which society views as pejorative” [1]. Some of these characteristics include irresponsibility, grandiosity, cunning, deceitfulness, selective impulsivity, sexual promiscuity, lack of empathy, etc. People who are psychopathic display not only antisocial behavior but also emotional impairment such as the lack of guilt. They are able to prey on others using their charm, deceit, violence or any other methods that allow them to get what they want. A strong feature of most of the behavior exhibited by individuals with psychopathy is that it is mostly instrumental in nature. They are extremely goal-oriented with interests in acquiring wealth, sexual opportunities and increased status.
The sense of entitlement that comes with sociopathy is astonishing to those who abide by the social laws and conventions of our culture. Where does the entitlement come from? It stems from an underlying sense of rage. Sociopaths feel deeply angry and resentful underneath their often-charming exterior, and this rage fuels their sense that they have the right to act out in whichever way they happen to choose at the time. Everything is up for grabs with sociopaths and nothing is off limits. (Meyers)
...res of the psychopaths and gives the reader various examples of these individuals playing out these characteristics in everyday life. A widely used checklist is provided so the reader can get a wide spanning view of what is accounted for when scoring a psychopath. This form of research is very important within the deceitfulness of this population; it allows the professional to ignore their words and examine their actions. Hare made it clear that it is not uncommon for there to be an emotional and verbal disconnect from their actions. With virtually no emotional functioning psychopaths feel no remorse for the offenses that they commit and it is very important that we work towards using the opportunities we have to study and assist these populations; not only for them but for ourselves.
One trait that psychopaths have is an overblown sense of self-worth (Baker). Robert Hare, the leading specialist in psychiatry, has made a psychopathy checklist to determine if someone has psychopathic tendencies. The second trait of his list is “Inflated view of his abilities and self-worth Psychopaths
The media most often showcases psychopaths as individuals who are inherently evil and dangerous towards themselves and others. Yet, this concept of psychopathy goes far beyond this idea of pure evil and instead necessitates a needed psychological understanding. These individuals, psychopaths, are generally characterized by a lack of empathy and conscience. Indeed, psychopath’s indifference to the repercussions of their actions combined with other characteristics such as hostility and aggression make for a potentially dangerous personality (Lyken, 1996, p.30). In order to identify a psychopath’s recidivism, it is important to differentiate them from sociopaths who, instead of having a psychological impairment that makes it difficult for them to socialize, have been systematically under socialized (Lyken, 1996, p.30). In accordance. psychologists have developed the methods such as the Psychopathy Checklist- Revised (PCL-R) to help identify those with psychopathic tendencies (Walters, 2012, p.409). That is why predictions of recidivism among psychopaths is most efficient when done
Criminal offenders are more likely to display certain narcissistic behaviors, such as low honesty and humility, a tendency for opposition and forcefulness, and a lack of empathy. These behaviors tend to increase if the criminal is a repeat offender. As we examine the article from The European Journal of Personality, we are able to note that all aspects of narcissism increase as a male goes from a non-offender, to a one time offender, to a repeat offender. The following items are from the Psychopathy Checklist. While there are (13) thirteen items, there are only (5) five which directly relate to narcissism.
New studies reveal that psychopaths not only understand right from wrong, but can justify their morally inappropriate actions regardless of the consequences. Psychology experts Maaike Cima, Marc Hauser and Franca Tonnaer devised a hypothesis that could potentially render previous preconceptions about psychopathy moot:
Criminality constitutes strategic mannerisms characterized by apathy to misery inflicted on others, egocentricity and depressed self-control. Habitual criminal behaviour seeks to satisfy the offender’s desires for material prestige, power or pleasurable feelings regardless to damage inflicted to victim or society. Such behaviors extend mistrust, fuel prejudice, and largely corrupt social cohesion. Biological, psychological and environmental attributes are thought to heavily influence antisocial and criminal behaviour. Numerous studies have proven that active emulation, genetic predispositions and psychosocial labeling are all complementary to development and expressions of criminal behaviour. There has historically been a myriad of theories that attempt to explain criminal behaviour through different perspectives, all which constitute intricate paradigms that play a role in expressio...