What Prompts Psychopathic Behaviour?

[Seil]

Serial Killers. What prompts the idea to kill people? Certainly it's different for each person, whether for ethnic, ulterior gains, or religion. But it prompts the question - why murder? What could prompt a person to commit one of the most socially heinous, religiously hedonistic crimes?

Herbert Mullin believed that he was chosen to stop a massive earthquake. Ed Gein was the son of a drunk and a harpy of a mother. Gary Ridgway had a strange childhood. Yang Xinhai was just upset about a breakup. Aileen Wuornos had a bad childhood. John Wayne Gacy was hit in the head with a swing.

We tend to view actual violence and murder as a bad, horrific thing, but in the media, who do we look for? Jonathan Kramer, Hannibal Lecter, Norman Bates, Dexter Morgan,
Leatherface, Freddy Kruger, Jason, and Michael Myers. Why do we watch violence portrayed in the media when we find reality so macabre?

[Toast]

The best psychological explanation for sociopathy/psychopathy has to do with damage or unusual development to the frontal and prefrontal lobes of the brain. Especially the prefrontal areas that are responsible for volition and emotional intensity. Probably the most famous or well known case of a non-serial killer where this kind of damage was present is Phineas Gage who had a railroad spike exploded through his head. The changes that Gage experienced include shortness of temper, vulgarity, difficulty making sound decisions, etc. Basically, he had a problem of stopping his impulses.

There are a couple other cases in one of my textbooks that I'll try to find later, but they had somewhat of an opposite reaction. Their had flat affect, which is basically a total loss of emotional intensity, and a lack of volition. One of them so bad that he wouldn't eat unless food was placed in front of him.

So, what does this have to do with serial killers? First, take someone with at least partial flat affect such that he doesn't feel fear or any other strong emotion. Then, diminish their control on their impulses. The rest appears to be influenced by environment and socialization. The label of Anti-social personality disorder is sometimes used, but I personally don't feel it is comprehensive enough to be relied on fully.

Further, anyone that says sociopaths don't know or can't tell right from wrong is inaccurate. It would be more accurate to say that harming others isn't wrong to them personally; otherwise most of them probably wouldn't go to such lengths to hide their victims. They tend to view everything either as a tool to be used or an obstacle to be overcome.

[Nique]

Further, anyone that says sociopaths don't know or can't tell right from wrong is inaccurate. It would be more accurate to say that harming others isn't wrong to them personally

Is the implication here that morality is not learned but is inherant, to some degree?

[Lumenskir]

Since the first part has already been answered (some people are just born with a brain that runs differently), I'll step up to the much easier second part, namely-

Why do we watch violence portrayed in the media when we find reality so macabre?

Fantastic escapism. Provided you can handle the fact that what you are watching/reading is fantasy it shouldn't really emotionally devastate you. It might induce emotions (fear, empathy, pity, whatever) but you can rest assured that it's all happening to fictional people who only exist for the same two hour time frame for eternity.

Plus there's the fact that most fantasy violence is, well, fantastic to a large extent, since dieing is just a manufactured part of the entertainment no different from the scenery or dialogue, so why not enjoy it?

[Nique]

so why not enjoy it?

Becuase it really is repulsive? I mean, the setting aside, a lot of horror films play off of real events, or at least very real fears. I find the slasher genre even more offensive than zombie/ monster films for the reason that they are based in reality.

It might induce emotions (fear, empathy, pity, whatever) but you can rest assured that it's all happening to fictional people who only exist for the same two hour time frame for eternity.

Yes nothing is ACTUALLY happening, but does that make it ok to be entertained by the actions being implied? How would you distinguish anymore between a real or fake act since by most horror movie creators admission, the aim is for realism? I understand violence is a part of storytelling, of entertainment, but in no other genre is it the goal or aim of the peice, and I find that disturbing.

(some people are just born with a brain that runs differently),

This seems like a dangerous generalzation. I mean, is it just 'different' or is it 'wrong'? Different implies that serial-killing is ok as an alternate lifestyle maybe?

[Lumenskir]

Becuase it really is repulsive?

It's repulsive to enjoy fiction now? As long as you can plainly comprehend that the actions you are watching are not real in any way I don't see where I have to actually apply a rigorous standard of morality to what is essentially a fabricated universe.

I find the slasher genre even more offensive than zombie/ monster films for the reason that they are based in reality.

I think that's why they keep getting made. The chance to experience something that we hope never happens to us or anyone we know, even if it happens second-hand through a proxy world, is an alluring experience for people I guess.

[Nique]

The chance to experience something that we hope never happens to us or anyone we know, even if it happens second-hand through a proxy world, is an alluring experience for people I guess.

Watching people ride around in space is cool. Westerns, action films, etc. But The allure of either preforming (by proxy) brutal murder/ torture or being the victim (by proxy) of it is completely lost on me.

It's repulsive to enjoy fiction now?

I think that's an oversimplification.

[I_Like_Swordchucks]

I'm siding with Nique here. Movies where murder is glamourized kind of disturb me. I never watched any of the Saw movies, simply because I couldn't see myself being entertained off of a couple of hours of physical and psychological torture, and one of the critics said it best:

"Its a sad reflection on our society why these movies continue to make money."

A couple of weeks ago, here in Canada, a kid was on a bus going to Winnipeg when the man next to him pulled out a large knife and stabbed him in the neck. To the horror of the other people on the bus, he proceeded to cut off the poor guy's head and began to cannibalize the remains. Sound like a horror movie to you? Well this was reality, and I don't think its very entertaining or moral to take such a disturbing concept and try and capitalize on that.

[D�rmatte]

I'm a huge fan of retribution. Somebody does something sufficiently horrible they should get it done back to themselves. When they finally catch that crazy serial-murdering pedophile rapist at the end of the show/movie/whatever, I can't help myself from thinking that whatever he gets it won't be enough. I enjoy the pain of others if I can justify doing so to myself, and I imagine most other people do too.

Watching innocent peolpe get mutilated for no other reason than shock value, though? Where's the fun in that?

Originally Posted by Nique

Is the implication here that morality is not learned but is inherant, to some degree?

Yes.

Pretty much everyone, everywhere act the same way and have the same basic values. Do not kill, lie, steal and so forth. These ideas (probably!) weren't passed down from above but from within - and not in a spiritual sense so much as a biological one. Life, the world and eveything just gets a whole lot easier to be in if people work together and help each other.

Sure, you can gather selfish benifits by breaking the rules, but being social creatures humans prefer to act together to common goals rather than selfish ones that tend to be destructive to everyone who isn't you.

[Gorefiend]

Originally Posted by Nique

Yes nothing is ACTUALLY happening, but does that make it ok to be entertained by the actions being implied? How would you distinguish anymore between a real or fake act since by most horror movie creators admission, the aim is for realism? I understand violence is a part of storytelling, of entertainment, but in no other genre is it the goal or aim of the piece, and I find that disturbing.

I agree. My friends are into horror porn movies (Hostel and all that) and when I ask them what they think it implies about them that they want to see that level of carnage happening to other human beings, they mostly freeze up or pretend I'm being stupid. I guess to do some amateur psychology, it might have to do with the tiny levels of actual violence in our society and the incredible amounts of violence present in all our other outlets so far.

Originally Posted by Nique

This seems like a dangerous generalization. I mean, is it just 'different' or is it 'wrong'? Different implies that serial-killing is ok as an alternate lifestyle maybe?

The issue here is that it really is different. There's precious little to do, without some sort of mandatory screening, which'd be expensive and may even get into 4th amendment crap. Especially if you then want to do something about those fellows, which if you start screening for them some people will want to do. Besides, how many psychopaths actually go out and kill people? We may have no idea. When they do go off and kill people it's absolutely wrong. But should we refer to what is essentially a brain defect as wrong?