Tag Archives: psychopath

Nuremburg: The first casualty of war is psychiatry?

A life in the Spirit, Film/TV, Psychological growth, , , , , , ,
Russell Crowe, Leo Woodall, Rami Malek

Nuremburg, the repeatable morality play

Between 1939 and 1945, Nazi Germany invaded many countries across Europe and occupied them with systematic brutality. They inflicted 27 million deaths in the Soviet Union alone and exterminated two-thirds of the continent’s Jewish population. Proposals for how to punish the defeated Nazi leaders ranged from a show trial (the Soviet Union) to summary executions (the United Kingdom). In mid-1945, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States agreed to convene a joint tribunal in Nuremberg, occupied Germany, with the Nuremberg Charter as its legal instrument. For nearly a year, beginning in November of 1945, the International Military Tribunal (IMT) tried 22 of the most important surviving leaders of Nazi Germany in the political, military, and economic spheres, as well as six German organizations. The purpose of the trial was not just to convict the defendants but also to collect irrefutable evidence of Nazi crimes, offer a history lesson to the defeated Germans, and delegitimize the traditional German elite.

Since the year of the tribunal, every generation has created a cinematic history lesson about the Nuremburg Trials. There is so much to learn and feel about the drama of seeing the captured Nazis being tried according to a new idea for international law. As the films try to make sense of what happened and preserve the memory, they also offer a look at the generation who made them.

Judgement at Nuremburg in 1961 had an all-star cast. It was based on a Teleplay by Abby Mann.

Nuremburg, a TV mini series  in 2000, starring Alec Baldwin, was based on Nuremberg: Infamy on Trial by Joseph E. Persico.

Now Nuremberg in 2025 has another all-star cast. This time, the film focuses on a psychiatrist, Douglas Kelley, played by Rami Malek. It is based on The Nazi and the Psychiatrist by Jack El-Hai.

The most recent re-telling is a very engaging movie for being mostly dialogue and courtroom scenes. The gist is: a WW2 psychiatrist evaluates Nazi leaders before the Nuremberg trials, growing increasingly obsessed with understanding evil as he forms a disturbing bond with Hermann Goering. [See this TIME review for more]

The movie circles around the growing relationship between Douglas Kelley and Goering. Kelley’s open mind is a perfect opportunity for Goering to plot whatever advantage he can achieve. Kelley is plagued by conscience, the Reichmaster is not. Goering plays on the psychiatrist’s sympathies and weaknesses as he positions himself to become a noble victim. His behavior is a textbook case of an anti-social personality disorder strategy many now call DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender) painted on a large, disturbing canvas.

Some have said the other psychiatrist who was brought in to join Douglas Kelley, Gustave Gilbert (played in the film by Colin Hanks), might have been the better psychiatrist on which to base the movie. The book he wrote, unlike Kelley’s, was quite well-received, mainly because Gilbert made a diagnosis and then proved it. But I think the filmmakers made the right decision to focus on Kelley. His empathy and his own troubled soul, which finally led him to suicide many years later, seems much more appropriate in our very unsure age, which is once again being seduced into subjugation by tyrants.

[Philosopher and filmmaker, Matthew Cooke, is dead set against these tyrants who are subject to their “dark triad” and so subjecting us all to their will.]

The amiable psychopath

Gilbert’s book is far from useless, however. In it he labeled Goering an “amiable psychopath” in an era in which the term “psychopath” was just coming into focus with some definition.  You can read about it in his collected notes: Nuremburg Diary.

There Gilbert recounts the life history of the number two Nazi. He says Goering’s  physical and intellectual “constitution” played its part in his rise to the top and aided his sadistic, aggressive leadership. But it was the cold Prussian home he experienced as a child that nurtured his lack of authentic feeling for others and led to his brutality.  He was fed on Teutonic legends and Junker militarism. As a result, Goering believed deeply in loyalty to the Kaiser, military chivalry, military aristocracy, and German superiority. Peaceful or democratic people were repulsive to him. He was never able to take punishment or to benefit from disapproval, so he became completely self-centered. The Nazi party provided the perfect opportunity for gaining power, for loyalty to an absolute Führer, for sadistic excitement, for revenge against enemies, and for unlimited financial gain. Play acting as an amiable nobleman served the needs of his fantasy image. At Nuremberg he gave a fine performance, but the final evidence of all the atrocities spoiled his heroic pose.

In the movie, Goering seems like a devoted husband and father. Kelley is portrayed as a delivery man keeping the family ties alive while Goering is in prison and his wife and daughter are in hiding. It is as hard to tell what he actually is in the movie as it is hard to unmask a sociopath in real life. One of the key strategies of psychopaths is to skillfully appear normal, even noble. So it is useful to list how these people work. It is typical to see these traits that make them “amiable.”

  • Superficial Charm and Narcissism: Goering was noted for his outgoing, flamboyant personality and a powerful charisma that could charm people, including his prison psychiatrist and other captors. His ability to form appealing, though superficial,  connections probably extended to his personal and family life, where he could maintain the appearance of a normal, loving relationship.
  • Lack of Empathy, Not Lack of All Emotion: Psychopathy is primarily characterized by a lack of empathy and shame, and a disregard for the rights and feelings of others, particularly those outside one’s immediate “circle.” It does not mean a complete absence of all emotion. Psychopaths can experience anger, excitement, and even a form of possessive “affection” for people they view as an extension of themselves or their property.
  • Family as an Extension of Self/Status: For a narcissist and psychopath like Goering, his wife and daughter were part of his curated life and status. He displayed meticulous attention to his body and image, and his family and servants were also well attended-to as extensions of himself. Their well-being and loyalty reflected positively on him and his image of being a powerful, successful man. His primary concern at Nuremberg was that his family was all right, which aligns with protecting his “possessions” or legacy.
  • Compartmentalization: Psychopaths are adept at compartmentalizing their lives.  Goering was able be intricately involved in the horrors of the Nazi regime — including planning the “final solution,” which he claimed was not his department, and at the same time was able to maintain a functional home life that appeared charmed. It is fascinating how he can demonstrate an extreme level of moral detachment and  separate his public atrocities from his private self-image.

In essence, Goering’s “warm” relationships were likely a form of selective attachment to people who served his self-image, status, and personal fantasies, rather than true, empathetic love that could extend to humanity in general. His actions demonstrated a profound lack of empathy and conscience, which are core features of psychopathy, despite his ability to maintain seemingly normal, even charming, interpersonal relationships.

Kelley facing the true Goering

Psychiatry becomes a casualty

Do you think it is indicative of our era that we would recast the Nuremburg trials by having a psychiatrist be the main protagonist? In 1961 the star was a judge (Spencer Tracey was a respectable 61 years old). In 2000 the star was a sexually-challenged prosecutor (Alec Baldwin was a 42-year old playing Justice Jackson at 53). In 2025 the star is a faulty psychiatrist (Egyptian, Rami Malek, 44, playing 33-year-old Kelley — beautifully, I might add, with a bit of Mr. Robot thrown in).

We see Douglas Kelley as flawed but also caring, daring and quick to learn. His experiences highlight the weaknesses of psychotherapy when it is subject to the culture and the state. And they highlight the inevitable weaknesses of psychotherapists when they try to navigate the mysteries of unique beings in flawed systems.

Here are his main failures that open his psychiatry to death blows:

  • He is seduced by a powerful narcissist, who is probably on the malignant narcissist to psychopath spectrum (my research). If a therapist loves his client (as I always do), it is a short walk to erasing the therapist-patient boundary that keeps a clinician within ethical guidelines and delivers the best care to the client. Kelley is gradually lured into the spider web where the lie can eat him.
  • When asked to break confidentiality, he does. Confidentiality is the bedrock of client-therapist trust. Kelley wants to maintain it, at first, and keeps many secrets from his superiors (like knowing the whereabouts of Goering’s family). But in the end he provides all his material and insight to the prosecutors.

Some would say maintaining the privacy of  a psychopath violates a psychotherapist’s “duty to inform.” That duty is a legal and ethical obligation for therapists to break patient confidentiality in specific circumstances, most notably when a client poses a serious and imminent threat to themselves or others. Often it is called the “duty to warn” or “duty to protect,” that requires therapists to take reasonable steps to prevent harm, which may include warning the potential victim, notifying law enforcement, or seeking higher levels of care for the client. It is a critical exception to the rule of confidentiality, designed to balance the need for a safe therapeutic relationship with the responsibility to protect public safety.

  • He connects secretly with Goering’s family in the name of fact-finding (today we might call it “systems work”). This is another aspect of Kelley’s deceptive behavior. He isn’t merely collecting facts, he is delighting in the affection of Goering’s daughter. He could have had a dialog with his superior, but in the hysteria of war and the lack of trust in his commander, there s a lot of room for his defense. While watching the movie, I often wondered out loud, “Who is the Nazi here?” In several places the prosecutor also has doubts about how to apply laws that the countries sitting in judgment have also blatantly violated. How is Kelley supposed to follow his rules?
  • He makes friends with his client. I wrote my dissertation on multiple relationships so I was especially interested in his dilemma. Boundaries were almost impossible to keep within the several small communities in which he was operating: 1) the military with its prohibitive regulations and demands for obedience to a commanding officer, 2) the German prisoners, who all had psychological needs and who were part of a tight-knit group with their own prohibitions and assumptions, 3) the Goering family system, in which he acted as a text book example of operating outside prescribed boundaries, not having informed consent in any number of ways.  Many critics point out the present ethics codes still assume a Eurocentric cityscape where individuals can decide their own fate and act autonomously, which no one in Kelley’s circumstances could, including him.
  • From the outset, he Intends to capitalize on his experience by writing a book. After all, he has an eyewitness intimacy with the authors of evil we need to understand. That’s not bad logic. His colleague, Gustav Gilbert, as I said, also wrote a book in which he delivered the verdict that all these people were disordered. Kelley’s book, 22 Cells in Nuremberg: A Psychiatrist Examines the Nazi Criminal, has more sympathy, pathos and uncertainty. When it comes to any therapist writing a book about their clients, I asked a colleague if confidentiality were required after a client was dead — after all, one cannot get permission to tell their story, since they have died. They said. “That’s right, you can’t.”
  • He would not consult and was probably too young and inexperienced for the job. Therapists are bound to refer clients to other, more competent, helpers when  they do not have the expertise to treat them. Kelley needed a lot of help and should have found it. But it is hard to imagine the clinician who had the credentials to be thrown into the cells of the unique and deranged people Kelley encountered, right? His assignment was to “keep them alive” and he failed in the eyes of his commander because Goering had a cyanide pill stashed in the uniform the higher-ups allowed him to retain. As with the rest of Kelley’s ethical missteps, there is a lot of room for forgiveness if not absolution. It would seem that the first casualty of war is not only the public truth, but the private, as well.

I imagined myself parachuted into Nuremburg after enjoying the fruitful work of helping men with PTSD, as Kelley had been doing. It seemed like a nightmare. I could relate to Kelley’s fascination and eagerness to meet these once-in-a-lifetime clients, to learn, and to be special. But he obviously did not know a great deal about sociopathy and its sister maladies or he definitely would have taken a different tack with Goering. And he probably would have taken another course with all the prisoners as a group, since they all had engaged in creating or or had been drawn into the sociopathic society of the Third Reich, a pathocracy.

As a Christian looking in from the outside, socially, and looking out from the inside, beyond ordinary awareness, I was not too surprised, just consistently sad as I watched the Nuremburg morality play rerun for our generation. The movie was so realistic, some people might call in cynical. But I think it was just being as clear as it could be: everyone has a unique story and many of us are not only fighting the traumas of normal life, we are beset by the disruption we face in our very genes.

The road to life is narrow for many reasons. I have to admit that my clients often end up on a spiritual journey, even when I am not overtly Christian with them. They need a deeper route to take, because the usual resources of society and the law are simply not enough to help them heal and grow, inside or out. Nuremburg pointed this out this lack in every character. Some may call it cynical for that reason, but I call it realistic. The Savior was not welcomed. There was very little of God in movie, but who but Jesus had any hope of making goodness out of hanging 22 devils? Wonderful things followed the horrors of the two great wars of the 20th century. But here we are again only 80 years later, facing the same sociopaths, only now there is not enough faith or even enough trust in the law to face them down.  Or so it only appears, I hope.

*****

Today is Hild Day! Meet this great leader from the 7th century church in Northumbria at the Transhistorical Body. 

Understanding and responding to a “sociopath”

Building community, Psychological growth, Spiritual direction, , , , , , ,

At the CAPS East Conference last week, I presented my research on sociopaths. I have been collecting it all year. If you follow this blog (thank you!), you have probably run into some of what I have learned. If  you want to get into the finished product with me (and I wish you would), I have put links to my previous posts at the end of this one, along with a link to the powerpoint I used in my presentation, which includes the reference list.

It all started with Trump’s portrait.

Like I keep saying, when I first saw Donald Trump’s “official portrait” I marveled at the audacious grandiosity of it. There is no hint of humility or welcome in it. It is designed to intimidate. It matches his endless talk about “winning.”  I admit I ignored it. I laughed it off.

But after his re-election, I decided I needed to turn back and face what we are all facing in that face. Now we know how disorienting and frightening it is to be dominated by a sociopathic president. When I started researching it, I mostly knew the stereotypes associated with sociopathy — which I just learned how to pronounce properly after church a couple of weeks ago during the coffee hour. I think I began by googling, “what is the go-to book about sociopaths?”

I found the book and started with it: The Sociopath Next Door. Martha Stout’s classic from 2005 reads like a prophecy these days. It is academic enough. But its strongest point is its collection of case studies which prove her point: you might run into a sociopath next door and there are responses you should have ready when you do.

Barry Goldwater, Mary Trump’s Book, Anton Ashcroft

Can you diagnose someone you’ve never met?

I just suggested Trump is a sociopath. People asked me if I were afraid I had offended someone when I did the same at the conference. The president already has us scared to exercise our consciences in the face of the uncertainty of what my happen to us! I was not afraid to present my arrangement of evidence-based psychological study integrated with my Christian practice.

The most arguable thing I did was suggest Trump fit the definition. Because I agree that a professional cannot effectively diagnose someone they have never met. At the same time I also agree with people who say that diagnoses, in general, are rather suggestive and subjective even when one does know a person. I also agree with thoughtful people who say the ethics about diagnosing public figures may be outdated.

The APA formally added the Goldwater Rule to the ethics code in 1973, some time after Barry Goldwater won his libel case against Fact Magazine. Fact  published a survey of psychiatrists regarding his mental fitness to be president. He was not found to be fit. He lost by a landslide in 1964.

Like many ethics rules, the Goldwater Rule is roundly debated, especially when it is seen in light of a psychotherapist’s general duty to give warning when they know or even suspect sexual predators and murderous people are likely to act.  With A.I. and years of constant exposure,  writings, and history we can access about people like Donald Trump, things may be different than in 1973. Unlike most people on the Anti-social Personality Disorder spectrum, Trump does all his sinning brazenly, like tearing down the East Wing of the White House last week.

We have a lot of evidence for Trump’s sociopathy. For instance, Trump’s niece, Mary, a clinical psychologist, wrote the book (pictured above). She and Michael D’Antonio, a biographer, provide quite a bit of evidence for Trump being a sociopath. For instance, his mother was sick for a year when he was 2. His father Fred trained his sons to be “killers,” no empathy or vulnerability allowed. In the Art of the Deal Trump recalls giving his music teacher a black eye as an elementary kid. He was banished to military school at 13 where he was a loud-mouthed bully. George Conway put all the evidence together in an ad sponsored by his Anti-Psychopath Pac. (Access via Bing. I think he is banned on Google).

Anton Ashcroft (seen above), working in forensic psychology in 2016,  wrote Donald Trump: Narcissist, Psychopath or representative of the people? He claims, though he has never met Trump, it is his duty to warn people before they normalize his behavior. Your conscience will have to be your guide when his evidence calls for your conclusion.

2016 seems like a long time ago, now that Trump is fomenting a war with Venezuela and Mike Johnson refuses to let the House of Representatives convene. Ashcroft’s resistance is to a bygone ethics which presume an orderly set of institutions and common assumptions about propriety. Those presumptions are gone, it seems. So his diagnosis may be more relevant than ever, now that the traits of 4% of the population, many of whom are in prison (unless Trump has pardoned them), are being worked into the government, into world society, and into our individual lives.

No one has ever known what to do when the people on the sociopath spectrum — the People of the Lie as M. Scott Peck named them, get into power (which they normally don’t). People either try to avoid them or kill them. But killing them is not an immediate option for me. So I have been trying to understand them, at least, and discerning the most helpful responses God can suggest.

The research leads to the right questions

Martha Stout’s book is a plea to people of conscience to recognize and resist the ruthless among them. Her book formed the heart of my presentation. She helped me learn how NPD, ASPD, sociopathy and psychopathy form a spectrum of disorders coming into prominence in this “age of monsters.”

Counselors and educators can provide a truth-telling service to the unsuspecting society who cannot fathom the lack of conscience and single-minded will to power this 4% of the population suffers under.

We need to clarify what we are dealing with.

  • The definition of these people has become a bit muddy.
  • Is there really no cure for Anti-social Personality Disorder?
  • The idea of conscience needs to be clearer.
  • Are the assumptions about conscience fading with the diminishing influence of Judeo-Christian morality?
  • The factors, other than immorality, which cause sociopathy, need to be better researched and known.
  • Treatment options and interventions need to be more available to therapists, parents and law enforcement.

How do we respond to a person who has no guilt or shame, even biologically? I offered eight ways to respond and zeroed in on protecting our individual and societal consciences. I also highlighted the increasingly prevalent strategy of domination people on the ASPD spectrum use called DARVO — V.P. Vance has become as expert.

The definition of “sociopath”

I use the term “sociopath,” even though “psychopath” might work just as well. Neither term has a well-differentiated definition and neither appears in APA’s DSM – the repository of approved definitions for psychotherapists and researchers. But both terms are titles for ongoing study on the disorder. The American Psychological Association (APA) developed the term Anti-social Personality Disorder (ASPD)  because the terms sociopath and psychopath stigmatized people who got labeled that way.

Here are the criteria for ASPD:  1) failure to conform to social norms, 2) deceitfulness, manipulativeness, 3) impulsivity, failure to plan ahead, 4) irritability, aggressiveness, 5) reckless disregard for the safety of self or others, 6) consistent irresponsibility, 7) lack of remorse after having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another person.

Martha Stout adds color to the list to make it clearer: 1) sociopathic charisma, 2) a grandiose sense of self worth, 3) the need for stimulation, risk taking, 4) pathological lying, defrauding, 5) callousness, no empathy, the inability to bond.

What do we do with a sociopath?

I say we have one planted in the White House and he must be removed before the weed comes to its inevitably rotten fruit. He is shamelessly pasting his picture over our lives. He would like to carve himself in Mt. Rushmore, put a Trump Arch in Washington DC and receive a Nobel Peace prize for settling conflicts he did not settle, even as he creates conflict that makes the whole world unsettled. His lies have a Wikipedia page. 

When we encounter people on the ASPD spectrum in our daily lives, even if we are not certain, we must do our best to discern the motivation behind their behavior and respond to them as they are, not according to their deceptions or our idealizations. We must attend to our personal health and the health of society. We might not have all the solutions or have the power to effect the necessary changes — but our voices matter; our responses matter. Having a clear conscience before God and others matters.

We can have some empathy for the conscienceless and imagine the horror they would experience, if they had the capacity to do so. Martha Stout says:

Imagine — if you can — not having a conscience, none at all,
no feelings of guilt or remorse no matter what you do,
no limiting sense of concern for the well-being of strangers, friends, or even family members.
Imagine no struggles with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish, lazy, harmful, or immoral action you had taken…
You can do anything at all, and still your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are kept in line by their consciences, will most likely remain undiscovered.
How will you live your life?
What will you do with your huge and secret advantage?

We can love sociopaths with everlasting love. We might be able to help them. But don’t offer sociopaths pity and don’t waste your time shaming them (which is essentially negative pity). Never assume they are like you, with your guilt, shame and doubts; they are not. Keep asking, “What are they doing with their huge, secret advantage?” And tell the truth about your answers — to yourself and to everyone who will listen.

My previous blog posts on this subject. 

Say “No” now: It won’t get better. (April 7, 2025)

Is a sociopath training you for evil?: 8 ways to spot one and survive them. (May 12, 2025)

Recognizing DARVO is the first step to freedom: 5 practical responses. (August 25, 2025)

Your conscience is in danger: The Bible can help.  (October 20, 2025)

The slides for my presentation, which include the references are here: Google Slides

**********

Today is Kolano Sabia Day! As a person among the royal families leading the “Spice Islands” he represents a fascinating story of colonial evangelism — its sordid beginnings and its lasting impact.  Get the story at The Transhistorical Body. 

Is a sociopath training you for evil?: 8 ways to spot one and survive them

A life in the Spirit, Psychological growth, Spiritual direction, , , , , , ,

sociopath portrait

When I first saw Donald Trump’s “official portrait” I had to marvel at the audacious grandiosity of it. There is no hint of humility or welcome in it. It is designed to intimidate. It matches his endless talk about “winning.” I had to turn away, to try to put him away.

But after his re-election, I decided I needed to turn back and face what we are all facing in that face. A sociopath is president. And all the traits of that 4% of the population are now being worked into the government, into world society, and into our individual lives. No one has ever known what to do when these people get into power (which they normally don’t), except avoid them or kill them – but those are not immediate options for me. So I am at least trying to understand them and discern the most helpful responses God can suggest.

The definition of “sociopath”

I am using the term “sociopath,” even though “psychopath” would work just as well. Neither term has a well-differentiated definition and neither appears in the DSM – the repository of approved definitions for psychotherapists and researchers. I’m using the term because when I decided to turn into the topic, I happened upon the “go to” book for people trying to understand: The Sociopath Next Door published in 2005 by Martha Stout. Someone said it should be required reading for everyone experiencing the Trump phenomenon, so I read it.

Stout’s popular book starts with “antisocial personality disorder” (ASPD), which is in the DSM. She lists the disorder’s seven symptoms. Demonstrating any three of these could achieve the label:  1) failure to conform to social norms, 2) deceitfulness, manipulativeness, 3) impulsivity, failure to plan ahead, 4) irritability, aggressiveness, 5) reckless disregard for the safety of self or others, 6) consistent irresponsibility, 7) lack of remorse after having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another person.

There are plenty of critics of this definition, as with any in the DSM. Some say it just defines “criminality.” Stout lists further traits that point toward a more complete picture: 1) sociopathic charisma, 2) a grandiose sense of self worth, 3) the need for stimulation, risk taking, 4) pathological lying, defrauding, 5) callousness, no empathy, the inability to bond.

The Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV) provides a list of twelve traits and asks the assessor to evaluate credible evidence for giving  a participant a 0, 1, or 2 score. If someone scores above 17, they are a confirmed psychopath. 1) Superficial, 2) Grandiose, 3) Deceitful, 4) Lacks remorse, 5) Lacks empathy, 6) Doesn’t accept responsibility, 7) Impulsive, 8) Poor behavioural controls. 9) Lacks goals, 10) Irresponsible, 11) Adolescent antisocial behaviour, 12) Adult antisocial behaviour. One forensic psychologist dared to rate Trump, in absentia, with the help of descriptions in books and articles about him and felt sorry for the world.

Some professionals work hard to differentiate between a psychopath and a sociopath. This is a helpful article to that end. Some have characterized the difference with this simple phrase: sociopaths are made and psychopaths are born. Stout goes to some length to demonstrate the genetic and physiological roots of sociopathy that lead to their lack of conscience, the trait that makes them uniquely different human beings. But it also seems to be true that young people labeled with ASPD can give up their behavior in later years and develop well-adjusted relationships.

After reading up on sociopaths, I am again convinced, when it comes to human beings, most labels are suggestive, not definitive. And most behavior needs to be assessed on a spectrum, with the therapist maintaining an ongoing sense of curiosity about how common traits are working out in an individual.

The sociopath spectrum

There is a cluster of disorders on a spectrum that describes a small percentage of the population who have an out-sized influence on everyone else because of the conscience they barely have or lack altogether. It is a bit easier to see them if we inspect their intent. What do these poor disordered people want?

Start with Narcissistic Personality Disorder in the lower range of the spectrum (NPD = 0-6% of the population). They want to preserve the image that protects their weak ego. Some of them feel remorse and empathy and can make functional relationships. They have probably been severely wounded.

Next add people labeled with Anti-social Behavior disorder (ASPD = .02-3.3% of the population). They want to gain self-esteem from power, personal gratification or  pleasure. These people are also known as sociopaths, though, as noted before, people labeled so when they are young have been known to change. Some say trauma creates them.

Next add the sociopaths. The term is used, often arbitrarily, to describe anyone who is apparently without conscience and is hateful or hate-worthy. Sociopaths make it clear they do not care how others feel. They are more likely to react violently when confronted with the consequences of their actions which makes it very hard for them to maintain work and family life. But violence is not an inherent trait of sociopaths or psychopaths.  Sociopaths can form attachments, but it is rare and very difficult. Their environment probably exacerbates their innate inability to care.

The term psychopath is sometimes used describe a sociopath who is simply more dangerous, like a mass murderer. They have no conscience (about 4% of the population). The only thing they really want is to “win.” The psychopath pretends to care but fails to recognize other people’s distress. They can follow social conventions when it suits their needs. Psychopaths are unable to form genuine emotional attachments. They have fake and shallow relationships designed to further their goals, which could be small or large, and which are usually unimagined by the 96%.

In describing the sociopath/psychopath end of this spectrum of disorder, Stout describes such a person whose

most impressive talent is his ability to conceal from nearly everyone the true emptiness of his heart – and to command the passive silence of those few who do know. …He knows how to smile. He is charming…He lies artfully and constantly, with absolutely no sense of guilt that might give him away in body language or facial expression. He uses sexuality as manipulation and hides emotional vacancy behind various respectable roles – corporate superstar, son-in-law, husband, father – which are nearly impenetrable disguises.  And if the charm and sexuality and role playing somehow fail, [he] uses fear, a sure winner. His iciness is fundamentally scary. Robert Hares writes, “Many people find it difficult to deal with the intense, emotionless, or ‘predatory’ stare of the psychopath,” and for some of the more sensitive people in his life, [the stare may be] the dispassionate hunter gazing at his psychological prey. If so, the result will probably be silence.

Protect your conscience

I think the society is being trained by sociopaths, right now. The president is their leader. If you just go through the behaviors listed above, you probably have little doubt about many people in the news. The innumerable lawsuits being filed are all about combatting behavior on the sociopath spectrum.

If you are a Christian, you probably agree with the New Testament writers who teach that our consciences can be injured, and blunted — and if you develop a “hardened heart,” it can wreck your all-important relationship with God. There is a lot of healthy discussion in the Bible about maintaining a conscience that resembles Jesus’ and stays open to the Spirit of God. But let me give you the teaching in just one little book, 1 Timothy:

But the aim of such instruction is love that comes from a pure heart, a good conscience, and sincere faith. Some people have deviated from these and turned to meaningless talk, desiring to be teachers of the law without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make assertions. (1:5-7)

This charge I commit to you, Timothy, my child, in accordance with the prophecies made earlier about you, so that by following them you may fight the good fight, having faith and a good conscience. By rejecting conscience, certain persons have suffered shipwreck in the faith; among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have turned over to Satan, so that they may be taught not to blaspheme. (1:18-20)

Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will renounce the faith by paying attention to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the hypocrisy of liars whose consciences are seared with a hot iron. (4:1-2)

If you feel like you must be living in the last days, you might be right. Pundits, protesters, prophets and preachers are working overtime to stand against the present “hypocrisy of liars whose consciences are seared with a hot iron.” As Paul teaches Timothy, having a living relationship with God, which keeps our consciences soft and clear, is a fundamental step in our self care.

8 ways to respond to a sociopath

There are many practical responses psychotherapists recommend when you are married to a psychopath, work with one, are led by one, or are just on the freeway with one.

  • Understand the tools of their trade

They are charm, seduction, and charisma — whatever draws us to let down our guard. Add the kind of “spontaneity” that draws you into taking risks you know are too much. Add acting skills — think Eve and the serpent. If you feel you are a step behind this person or your buttons are being pushed and you are being led along unwillingly, it is probably true.  Accept there are people with no conscience.

  • Watch the leader who says only they can save you.

They will seem good for you and then fold you into their aggressive plans. They use your empathy and compassion, creativity and desire-for-good against you. If your instinct tells you something is wrong with the leader, check out your instinct before proceeding — there are a few wolves in sheep’s clothing out there. Don’t hate everyone in case they are a wolf; just have discernment

In an age of lies, every light looks like a gaslight. If you think that, the sociopath wins their terrible game. Accept that people who find pleasure in dominating or scaring you are not like you. Their terrible behavior might be unimaginable, and you may blame yourself for being crazy to think they are terrible — and they will tell you that’s true. But remember that people with a conscience reflexively doubt themselves. Sociopaths don’t.

  • Habitually stand up to bullies.

In the age of psychopath billionaires competing with one another to win, many lesser bullies are being nurtured. If the 96% of us who have a conscience speak up and stand up to them, they tend to fold. You will have your doubts and fears, but you are not “rocking the boat,” you are keeping it afloat when you speak the truth in love.

  • Watch our for the “pity play”

Stout says “The most reliable sign, the most universal behavior of unscrupulous people is not directed, as one might imagine, at our fearfulness. It is, perversely, an appeal to our sympathy.” In Trump’s famous tweet, above, he brazenly says his impeachment, which was justified according to the evidence, is a “lynching.” But, of course. “We will win!”

  • Flee three-timers

One lie, one broken promise, or a single neglected responsibility may be a misunderstanding. Two may be a serious mistake. But three lies says you’re dealing with a liar. Deceit is the linchpin of conscienceless behavior. Cut your losses and get out. Consider Jesus and liars:

Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot accept my word. You are from your father the devil, and you choose to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. (John 8:43-45) 

  • Keep respect separate from fear

Many Christians have read in the Bible they are to “fear God.” They end up feeling overpowered by God and God seems like another predator in their jungle. But honoring God and others is what honorable people do, not coerced ones. Anxiety is not awe. A trauma reflex is not respect. “There is no fear in love.” Respect people who are strong, kind and morally courageous. When you obey out of fear, it is probably not in line with God or your own self-respect.

  • Don’t keep secrets for people

Obviously, confidentiality is a good thing, when appropriate. But you do not need to collude with people who beg you not to tell or insist you “owe” them silence in relation to their dirty deeds. You do not owe them anything. You are not part of their game, don’t play.

Most of these responses are very strong and do not sound loving — they are not normal for relating to people with a conscience. Definitions and lists make the process of discernment seem cut and dried. It is not. For instance, we cannot effectively label a person a sociopath, but even if we do, God is greater than psychopathy. Even if we are not certain, we must do our best to discern the motivation behind someone’s behavior and respond to them as they are, not according to their deception or our idealizations. We must attend to our personal health and the health of society. We might not have all the solutions or have the power to effect the necessary changes — but our voices matter; our responses matter. Having a clear conscience before God and others matters.

We can have some empathy for the conscienceless and imagine the horror they do not experience. Stout says:

Imagine — if you can — not having a conscience, none at all, no feelings of guilt or remorse no matter what you do, no limiting sense of concern for the well-being of strangers, friends, or even family members. Imagine no struggles with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish, lazy, harmful, or immoral action you had taken … You can do anything at all, and still your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are kept in line by their consciences, will most likely remain undiscovered. How will you live your life? What will you do with your huge and secret advantage?

But don’t offer them pity and don’t waste your time shaming them (which is essentially negative pity). Keep asking, “What are they doing with their huge, secret advantage?” And tell the truth about your answers, to yourself and to everyone who will listen.

________

Same picture going up on buildings