How to spot a psychopath.

Glibness/superficial charm
Grandiose sense of self-worth
Need for stimulation, with a proneness to boredom
Pathological lying
Conning and manipulating behaviors
No sense of remorse or guilt
A very shallow emotional affect - they display emotions they don't really feel
A lack of empathy for others
They are parasitic - they live off of others
They are impulsive, and show poor control over their behaviors
They tend to be promiscuous
Their behavior problems start early in life
They cannot form long-term plans that are realistic
They are impulsive, and irresponsible
They do not accept responsibility for their actions - another caused it
Marital relationships are short, and many
They display juvenile delinquency
They violate probation often
Their criminality is diverse

my niece read that somewhere.
we agreed it's an interesting and handy little test.
:)

nt

I doubt we have many psychopaths here, though.

I was talking to my boyfriend on the phone, he yawned and I told him it was making me yawn, he laughed and said "good."

I guess it's a test of empathy or something of the sort.

:spank:

:rofl:

e.g. blowing frogs up with fireworks (*); giving your home to orphan kittens and then disecting them for your college homework (Frist).

Be a serial killer in time, especially in children...

Bed wetting
Cruelty to animals
Pyromania

Need all three though.

Attend a republican fund raiser. You'll see dozens.

*ba-dum-dum*

I'm a SalesPeople!

sales-people with class and good character. LOL :hi:

I work in an office with about 60 Salesdogs, and I'd say a good half of them are just NO *UCKING GOOD.
If they aren't out and out repukes, they ARE selfish little money grubbers who wouldn't think twice about lying their asses off to sell our product.
Luckily, my product is a valuable one, and I don't feel that I have to embellish upon the truth to sell it.

P.S.: My customers COME BACK.

Most of them in the workplace.

Hare is the author of the book Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us. The premise of this book is that you probably know a psychopath. I was (and still am) convinced I lived one and spent a lot of time trying to find the actual criteria, which are only summarized in the book. Here's another list that I believe is closer to the actual criteria:

Glibness/superficial charm
Grandiosity
Pathological lying
Conning/manipulativeness
Lack of remorse or guilt
Shallow affect (emotional behavior)
Callousness/lack of empathy
Failure to accept responsibility for own actions
Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
Parasitic lifestyle
Poor behavioral controls (i.e., a bad temper or hot-headedness)
Early behavioral problems
Lack of realistic, long-term goals
Impulsivity
Irresponsibility
Juvenile delinquency
Revocation of conditional release (e.g., parole or probation)
Promiscious sexual behavior
Many short-term relationships (or marital relationships, depending on the source of the criteria)
Criminal versatility

I wasn't able to find any supporting descriptive detail for these criteria on the internet. It's important to have that, I think, instead of just making your own subjective decisions on what the titles mean. Need for stimulation and proneness to boredom, for example, apparently involves an element of physical danger.

It's also important to note that Hare has only ever studied prisoners and consequently missed the vast majority of psychopaths who never run up against the law, and his criteria are only research criteria. The actual instrument is complex and multidimensional, I'm sure, and requires a qualified professional to administer. The diagnostician awards 0-2 points on each criterion, with 30 or more points warranting a "research diagnosis" of psychopathy. That means the subject qualifies for a study.

In Without Conscience, Hare is careful not to call anyone a psychopath and includes a boldfaced caution against diagnosing and labeling others. Of course it's less of an issue for those of us who don't get paid to subject ourselves to psychopathic abuse.

Psychopaths are easy to spot - especially after a run-in with one - but we shouldn't engage in armchair diagnosis. The psychological profession doesn't like that, for obvious reasons.

... at 1600 PA Ave. in D.C.

Wonder if that woman will ever get her soul back.

were harmless as far as I knew. I wonder, is there a cure? Or, do we need to identify them and warn society about them? I have no idea how to deal with these people other than to try protect my family and friends and myself from them.

Oh. Bush. Gotcha.