That's not how I read that. Absence of guilt removes the programmed automatic response enabling a person to make a decision based on logic or truth. It doesn't mean that they will, that depends on their motivations.
How do you get absence of guilt removes programmed automated response? If I witness an idiot poorly leading or baiting a conversation my automated response is rage. The same rage I assume someone guilty would also exhibit. Broadly assuming someone is guilty because of an automated response is dangerous territory. People that are sensitive to the lexicon and well trained in communication arts will take great offense to word fuckery being used against them.
Not to start a “does anyone else feel like this??” thread, but I wonder how common these traits are in tech workers. It’s kind of a cliché that CS attracts antisocial nerds. If a serious study were made, how many of those would actually meet the criteria for antisocial personality disorder?
Although diagnosis seems to rely a lot on someone’s behavior: if you don’t cause trouble, then it’s not a disease, just a personality trait. That seems a bit unfair to the people who would identify with this, could use psychiatric help to make human connection easier, but aren’t unreasonable enough to warrant medical attention.
The GP conflates "tech workers" and "CS" but it's pretty clear that this is the target of the second paragraph: folks who are happy to do work that harms society without doing anything that rises to the level of mandatory treatment. That tendency has been a big part of the so-called "techlash" the last several years.
That said, I don't think this is unique to tech (cf. finance or politics).
Being antisocial doesn't mean antisocial personality disorder, many other mental health conditions can cause people to become antisocial. We're getting confused here really because antisocial can both mean "withdrawn" and "hostile" and those aren't really the same thing.
There are many things that can cause social deficits other than antisocial personality disorder, too many to bother listing.
It used to be back in the day. From the time web devs have come in they are the most social nerds with slick hair and bending over backwards to do leetcode group of folk.
Am I missing something, or did the woman claim sociopaths are only kept in check by the threat of violence? How are we supposed to trust sociopaths to do the right thing when times get tough?
Though, it does make a lot of sense given the behavior we commonly see from CEOs and politicians.
I’m pretty sure that a lot of people would have antisocial behavior if it weren’t for the fear or inconvenience of consequences. You don’t have to match a DSM definition to be a bad person.
Hopefully by the time sociopaths are able to cause severe damage, they have experienced some kind of negative consequence that caused them to pause but only for the consequences and not for emotions or feelings.
Trusting a sociopath may be the leap you do not want to take. Most of the post caught prison interviews are somewhat like “no one stopped me” or “no one caught me”. I think for each task given that someone will not take there is a long line of people who will.
Some groups can choose to sort these people in.
“the extent to which a lot of behaviors that people do could be considered sociopathic, and we just don’t understand them that way. >>> Plenty of us do things that we know are bad because the transgressions feel good. It feels good […] because it feels free. […] The consequences — be it internal guilt or getting thrown in jail — happen after. In this moment, I’m going to do this because it feels [expletive] great to just not care. That is what the sociopath experience is almost all the time.
One piece of advice I would give to anyone who sees themselves in my description is to find an external philosophy that works for you. I liked karma. It seemed clean. It seemed organized. Find that philosophy for yourself, because you’re not going to get to rely on internal checks and balances.”
Sociopathy like near anything else exists on a spectrum. Don't make sweeping generalizations from this woman's words.
That said, fear of consequence is an extremely strong deterrent to most people, sociopath or not.
We have laws and consequences for those laws because society doesn't function well without them.
Anyone else find the article footnotes to be really.. moralizing? It's like the author had to keep injecting that they are a non-sociopathic, responsible member of society with good thoughts as opposed to the interviewee.
Two choices… keep typing on the internet while further cornering oneself into a purely contextual analysis bucket of doom or stop typing and watch the house of cards fall silently. The boundaries between public, private, and secret lives are dissolving. One day we may have a population of truly authentic people. Until then we have a parlay of persona and signals.
Readit News
Not having guilt doesn't mean you're basing decisions on "logic" or "truth".
Interesting article
Although diagnosis seems to rely a lot on someone’s behavior: if you don’t cause trouble, then it’s not a disease, just a personality trait. That seems a bit unfair to the people who would identify with this, could use psychiatric help to make human connection easier, but aren’t unreasonable enough to warrant medical attention.
Say what? CS attracts asocial nerds.
antisocial = commits crimes and harms society
asocial = introverted or unsociable
The GP conflates "tech workers" and "CS" but it's pretty clear that this is the target of the second paragraph: folks who are happy to do work that harms society without doing anything that rises to the level of mandatory treatment. That tendency has been a big part of the so-called "techlash" the last several years.
That said, I don't think this is unique to tech (cf. finance or politics).
There are many things that can cause social deficits other than antisocial personality disorder, too many to bother listing.
Deleted Comment
The need to put everyone in a box and keep them there is the real sociopathic behavior and it is not the individual doing it. It’s the institutional.
Though, it does make a lot of sense given the behavior we commonly see from CEOs and politicians.
Deleted Comment
Trusting a sociopath may be the leap you do not want to take. Most of the post caught prison interviews are somewhat like “no one stopped me” or “no one caught me”. I think for each task given that someone will not take there is a long line of people who will. Some groups can choose to sort these people in.
“the extent to which a lot of behaviors that people do could be considered sociopathic, and we just don’t understand them that way. >>> Plenty of us do things that we know are bad because the transgressions feel good. It feels good […] because it feels free. […] The consequences — be it internal guilt or getting thrown in jail — happen after. In this moment, I’m going to do this because it feels [expletive] great to just not care. That is what the sociopath experience is almost all the time. One piece of advice I would give to anyone who sees themselves in my description is to find an external philosophy that works for you. I liked karma. It seemed clean. It seemed organized. Find that philosophy for yourself, because you’re not going to get to rely on internal checks and balances.”
That said, fear of consequence is an extremely strong deterrent to most people, sociopath or not. We have laws and consequences for those laws because society doesn't function well without them.