Oh Dorthy Lewis… I really really hope her research in her earlier career was more rigorous and of higher quality than her forensic evaluations currently. She’s a great example of the way confirmation bias influences research results. She said while testifying for a high profile trial last year that all murderers have DID. Not they might have DID or some have DID, all of them have DID. 🤦🏻♀️ Then the prosecution showed hours of her interviewing the defendant and essentially helping that defendant develop all several fake identities. Then she said she knew without doubt that the defendant wasn’t lying because no one would lie so badly. 😳 She did zero forensic tests to gage for malingering or feigning and neurological tests showed nothing. I work in academia and watching her testimony was physically painful because if her colleagues were watching, omg they would be horrified. And anytime the prosecutor asked her to explain her reasoning, she would act like, how dare you ask me a reasonable question that happens to challenge my conceptualization which is definitely correct because I say so. It honestly made me rethink the validity of her past research. Not her theory but her actual research and the quality of it.
I saw a study done stating there was a genetic component to psychopaths. The study follows a large group of children who were diagnosed as psychopaths. They found the children were not receptive to negative "consequences" of their actions, but did respond to positive reinforces to anything they did that was "good". I have always wondered - is a psychopath born or made?
Personal responsibility means if it happened because of you then it's your fault, regardless of any contributing factors. They still did it. That's how I feel and would think the families of the victims to these people who have been affected or the victims themselves would feel the same way.
I hate the term evil, it almost gives the offender a religious get out. Serial killers are bad people who choose to go outside the 'norms of society'. They function in society but have this abhorrent behaviour that is hidden for them to remain in such society. They are careful, cunning, manipulative and even when they have a low IQ have a common sense to survive unknown in the world.
I agree. Your comment reminded me of the mother of Darrell Brooks. She blamed mental illness, drugs, baby momma(s), dropped him on his head as a baby. He drove her car through a Christmas parade, killing many, injured many. His momma had just bonded him out, gave him her car to drive. She bonded him out for running over his gf, with the same car he would run through the parade in.
The thing that strikes me about declaring that we have free will and are therefore always responsible (and should be help responsible) for our actions is that it is a "God of the gaps" argument. We already accept that things like alcohol, or brain damage, or even fear are mitigating influences - effectively reducing he domain of "free will". The harder we look the smaller that domain becomes. So you really have to ask if it's there at all - and even if it still is, being so constrained does it even matter?
I took an ambien while on vacation with my dad at a ski resort. In the middle of the night I woke up and grabbed one foot warmer, emptied my wallet on the table and headed out on the town in the 7 degree weather. Next thing I remember is waking up in the drunk tank in the local sheriff's office. I don't take that stuff anymore!
On the question of free- will and your thought-provoking discussion, the subject of addictions, comes to mind. Many argue that the individual, addicted, has a choice ( free will) while, others argue, that the addicted, person, doesn't have free-will - that a series of "other" factors, identified as spiritual, physical and mental, kick- in and together in some sort of chemical reaction , remove free-will, for that person, who otherwise, functions "normally". In this instance and many debated between you, I'd argue that the issue of free-will and its loss in the individual , needs to be the focus ( the deniel) and in this, the hard work( examination) begins, and invariably, shows, that it's the persons denial, which is the blockage, which they can admit to , if they want it- not need it - want it, being the essential componant here. As an existentialist , i'd argue that there's always a choice, to exersise free-will, unless there is a neurological issue etc...
Is there any study on whether DID (all of the various personalities or individuals) exists on a cellular level, i.e. in the brain? A version of "siamese twins" for lack of a better way to describe it. Numerous individuals existing on a cellular level, in ones brain, which could explain DID in some cases, and perhaps differing internal "voices". Where, if this were explained as a "physical" anomoly, instead of psychiatric one, thus less stigmatized, the only option would be "therapy" to teach the person what it is, how to exist and thrive and maintain their individuality in spite of it. Somewhat like a person born with two heads (using an example we CAN physically see) (??) I guess if this might never be knowable (except perhaps advances in DNA within the body) whether psych or physical does it matter in a practical way? Thoughts?
With the exception of the divorce of his parents, Jeffrey Dahmer had a seemingly normal childhood. Yet he was torturing animals since he was a kid and he turned out to be one of the most horrific killers in history. Society’s homophobia didn’t make him. You have to certainly believe he was born a certain way and his brain just wasn’t wired the same way as everyone else. If we can accept that we are all born inherently different and that men are inherently more violent than women, we should be able to accept that serial killers are born that way and society/their environment just encourages them to murder.
You're forgetting he was also neglected, socially and emotionally. As a child, socialization is so so important from the parents. Mom was drugged and drunk all the time, and dad was always traveling for work. When he was home, he was always fighting with mom. So, not a lot of attention was put towards him. I'm not saying that makes a serial killer. I'm saying his childhood was definitely abnormal and just as abusive as if his dad or mom was beating him as neglect can be equally traumatic. He would have had to forcibly push down his own emotions, and long term that can be associated with an emotional shut down that we see in his later years and perhaps would have fed into his lack of empathy that would have otherwise stopped him. Also, I don't think what they're saying here is that a homophobic society invented Dahmer. I think what they are saying is he was never allowed to openly feel his emotions and that affected his ability to process them.
Psychology of Squid Game please
Oh Dorthy Lewis… I really really hope her research in her earlier career was more rigorous and of higher quality than her forensic evaluations currently. She’s a great example of the way confirmation bias influences research results. She said while testifying for a high profile trial last year that all murderers have DID. Not they might have DID or some have DID, all of them have DID. 🤦🏻♀️ Then the prosecution showed hours of her interviewing the defendant and essentially helping that defendant develop all several fake identities. Then she said she knew without doubt that the defendant wasn’t lying because no one would lie so badly. 😳 She did zero forensic tests to gage for malingering or feigning and neurological tests showed nothing. I work in academia and watching her testimony was physically painful because if her colleagues were watching, omg they would be horrified. And anytime the prosecutor asked her to explain her reasoning, she would act like, how dare you ask me a reasonable question that happens to challenge my conceptualization which is definitely correct because I say so. It honestly made me rethink the validity of her past research. Not her theory but her actual research and the quality of it.
I saw a study done stating there was a genetic component to psychopaths. The study follows a large group of children who were diagnosed as psychopaths. They found the children were not receptive to negative "consequences" of their actions, but did respond to positive reinforces to anything they did that was "good". I have always wondered - is a psychopath born or made?
Made
@@sarahw7616we don't know.
Personal responsibility means if it happened because of you then it's your fault, regardless of any contributing factors. They still did it. That's how I feel and would think the families of the victims to these people who have been affected or the victims themselves would feel the same way.
I hate the term evil, it almost gives the offender a religious get out. Serial killers are bad people who choose to go outside the 'norms of society'. They function in society but have this abhorrent behaviour that is hidden for them to remain in such society. They are careful, cunning, manipulative and even when they have a low IQ have a common sense to survive unknown in the world.
I agree. Your comment reminded me of the mother of Darrell Brooks. She blamed mental illness, drugs, baby momma(s), dropped him on his head as a baby. He drove her car through a Christmas parade, killing many, injured many. His momma had just bonded him out, gave him her car to drive. She bonded him out for running over his gf, with the same car he would run through the parade in.
Evol just reminds me of Satan
The thing that strikes me about declaring that we have free will and are therefore always responsible (and should be help responsible) for our actions is that it is a "God of the gaps" argument.
We already accept that things like alcohol, or brain damage, or even fear are mitigating influences - effectively reducing he domain of "free will".
The harder we look the smaller that domain becomes. So you really have to ask if it's there at all - and even if it still is, being so constrained does it even matter?
I took an ambien while on vacation with my dad at a ski resort. In the middle of the night I woke up and grabbed one foot warmer, emptied my wallet on the table and headed out on the town in the 7 degree weather. Next thing I remember is waking up in the drunk tank in the local sheriff's office. I don't take that stuff anymore!
On the question of free- will and your thought-provoking discussion, the subject of addictions, comes to mind. Many argue that the individual, addicted, has a choice ( free will) while, others argue, that the addicted, person, doesn't have free-will - that a series of "other" factors, identified as spiritual, physical and mental, kick- in and together in some sort of chemical reaction , remove free-will, for that person, who otherwise, functions "normally". In this instance and many debated between you, I'd argue that the issue of free-will and its loss in the individual , needs to be the focus ( the deniel) and in this, the hard work( examination) begins, and invariably, shows, that it's the persons denial, which is the blockage, which they can admit to , if they want it- not need it - want it, being the essential componant here. As an existentialist , i'd argue that there's always a choice, to exersise free-will, unless there is a neurological issue etc...
White-collar crime, such as tax evasion, is said to be lightly punished.
Fascinating ❤
LOVE that Berto is citing Sam Harris. APPALLED that Kirk has NO IDEA? who Sam Harris is!!!!
Sam Harris is cool
Loved this one!
The term "evil" seems to be religious in America or the English language. For me as a German, it doesn't. It has more of an emotional meaning.
Is there any study on whether DID (all of the various personalities or individuals) exists on a cellular level, i.e. in the brain? A version of "siamese twins" for lack of a better way to describe it. Numerous individuals existing on a cellular level, in ones brain, which could explain DID in some cases, and perhaps differing internal "voices". Where, if this were explained as a "physical" anomoly, instead of psychiatric one, thus less stigmatized, the only option would be "therapy" to teach the person what it is, how to exist and thrive and maintain their individuality in spite of it. Somewhat like a person born with two heads (using an example we CAN physically see) (??) I guess if this might never be knowable (except perhaps advances in DNA within the body) whether psych or physical does it matter in a practical way? Thoughts?
I enjoyed this and agree
Pleasses psychology of squid gamess
This is wild, but my shower thoughts this morning were about this subject!
🔥🔥🔥
With the exception of the divorce of his parents, Jeffrey Dahmer had a seemingly normal childhood. Yet he was torturing animals since he was a kid and he turned out to be one of the most horrific killers in history. Society’s homophobia didn’t make him. You have to certainly believe he was born a certain way and his brain just wasn’t wired the same way as everyone else. If we can accept that we are all born inherently different and that men are inherently more violent than women, we should be able to accept that serial killers are born that way and society/their environment just encourages them to murder.
You're forgetting he was also neglected, socially and emotionally. As a child, socialization is so so important from the parents. Mom was drugged and drunk all the time, and dad was always traveling for work. When he was home, he was always fighting with mom. So, not a lot of attention was put towards him. I'm not saying that makes a serial killer. I'm saying his childhood was definitely abnormal and just as abusive as if his dad or mom was beating him as neglect can be equally traumatic. He would have had to forcibly push down his own emotions, and long term that can be associated with an emotional shut down that we see in his later years and perhaps would have fed into his lack of empathy that would have otherwise stopped him. Also, I don't think what they're saying here is that a homophobic society invented Dahmer. I think what they are saying is he was never allowed to openly feel his emotions and that affected his ability to process them.
Psychology of the Left please.
Firsttt
2nd
Seventeenth!