Psychopath
Superficial charm and good
"intelligence"
More often
than not, the typical psychopath will seem particularly agreeable and make a
distinctly positive impression when he is first encountered. Alert and friendly in his attitude, he is
easy to talk with and seems to have a good many genuine interests. There is nothing at all odd or queer about
him, and in every respect he tends to embody the concept of a well-adjusted,
happy person. Nor does he, on the other
hand, seem to be artificially exerting himself like one who is covering up or
who wants to sell you a bill of goods.
He would seldom be confused with the professional backslapper or someone
who is trying to ingratiate himself for a concealed purpose. Signs of affectation or excessive affability
are not characteristic. He looks like
the real thing.
… Very often indications of good sense and sound reasoning will emerge and
one is likely to feel soon after meeting him that this normal and pleasant
person is also one with high abilities….
…Although the psychopath's inner emotional deviations and deficiencies
may be comparable with the inner status of the masked schizophrenic, he
outwardly shows nothing brittle or strange.
Everything about him is likely to suggest desirable and superior human
qualities, a robust mental health.
Absence of delusions and other signs
of irrational thinking
The
so-called psychopath is ordinarily free from signs or symptoms traditionally
regarded as evidence of a psychosis. He
does not hear voices. Genuine delusions
cannot be demonstrated. There is no
valid depression, consistent pathologic elevation of mood, or irresistible
pressure of activity. Outer perceptual
reality is accurately recognized; social values and generally accredited
personal standards are accepted verbally.
Excellent logical reasoning is maintained and, in theory, the patient
can foresee the consequences of injudicious or antisocial acts, outline
acceptable or admirable plans of life, and ably criticize in words his former
mistakes. The results of direct
psychiatric examination disclose nothing pathologic - nothing that would
indicate incompetency or that would arouse suspicion
that such a man could not lead a successful and happy life.
Not only is the psychopath rational and his thinking
free of delusions, but he also appears to react with normal emotions. His ambitions are discussed with what appears
to be healthy enthusiasm. His
convictions impress even the skeptical observer as firm and binding. He seems to respond with adequate feelings to
another's interest in him and, as he discusses his wife, his children, or his
parents, he is likely to be judged a man of warm human responses, capable of
full devotion and loyalty.
Absence of "nervousness" or
psychoneurotic manifestations
There are
usually no symptoms to suggest a psychoneurosis in the clinical sense. In fact, the psychopath is nearly always free
from minor reactions popularly regarded as "neurotic" or as
constituting "nervousness."
The chief criteria whereby such diagnoses as hysteria,
obsessive-compulsive disorder, anxiety state, or "neurasthenia" might
be made do not apply to him. It is
highly typical for him not only to escape the abnormal anxiety and tension
fundamentally characteristic of this whole diagnostic group but also to show a
relative immunity from such anxiety and worry as might be judged normal or
appropriate in disturbing situations.
Regularly we find in him extraordinary poise rather than jitteriness or
worry, a smooth sense of physical well-being instead of uneasy preoccupation
with bodily functions. Even under
concrete circumstances that would for the ordinary person cause embarrassment,
confusion, acute insecurity, or visible agitation, his relative serenity is
likely to be noteworthy
It is true
he may become vexed and restless when held in jails or psychiatric
hospitals. This impatience seems related
to his inability to realize the need or justification for his being
restrained. What tension or uneasiness
of this sort he may show seems provoked entirely by external circumstances,
never by feelings of guilt, remorse, or intrapersonal insecurity. Within himself he appears almost as incapable
of anxiety as of profound remorse.
Unreliability
Though the
psychopath is likely to give an early impression of being a thoroughly reliable
person, it will soon be found that on many occasions he shows no sense of responsibility
whatsoever. No matter how binding the
obligation, how urgent the circumstances, or how important the matter, this
holds true. Furthermore, the question of
whether or not he is to be confronted with his failure or his disloyalty and
called to account for it appears to have little effect on his attitude.
… They may apply their excellent abilities in business or in study for a
week, for months, or even for a year or more and thereby gain potential
security, win a scholarship, be acclaimed top salesman or elected president of
a social club or perhaps of a school honor society. Not all checks given by psychopaths bounce;
not all promises are uniformly ignored.
They do not necessarily land in jail every day (or every month) or seek
to cheat someone else during every transaction.
If so, it would be much simpler to deal with them. This transiently (but often convincingly)
demonstrated ability to succeed in business and in all objective affairs makes
failures more disturbing to those about them.
Furthermore,
it cannot be predicted how long effective and socially acceptable conduct will
prevail or precisely when (or in what manner) dishonest, outlandish, or
disastrously irresponsible acts or failures to act will occur. These seem to have little or no relation to
objective stress, to cyclic periods, or to major alterations of mood or
outlook…The psychopath's unreliability and his disregard for obligations and
for consequences are manifested in both trivial and serious matters, are masked
by demonstrations of conforming behavior, and cannot be accounted for by
ordinary motives or incentives. Although
it can be confidently predicted that his failures and disloyalties will
continue, it is impossible to time them and to take satisfactory precautions
against their effect. Here, it might be
said, is not even a consistency in inconsistency but an inconsistency in
inconsistency.
Untruthfulness and insincerity
The
psychopath shows a remarkable disregard for truth and is to be trusted no more
in his accounts of the past than in his promises for the future or his
statement of present intentions. He
gives the impression that he is incapable of ever attaining realistic
comprehension of an attitude in other people which causes them to value truth
and cherish truthfulness in themselves.
Typically
he is at ease and unpretentious in making a serious promise or in (falsely)
exculpating himself from accusations, whether grave or trivial. His simplest statement in such matters
carries special powers of conviction.
Overemphasis, obvious glibness, and other traditional signs of the
clever liar do not usually show in his words or in his manner. Whether there is reasonable chance for him to
get away with the fraud or whether certain and easily foreseen detection is at
hand, he is apparently unperturbed and does the same impressive job. Candor and
trustworthiness seem implicit in him at such times. During the most solemn perjuries he has no
difficulty at all in looking anyone tranquilly in the eyes. Although he will lie about any matter, under
any circumstances, and often for no good reason, he may, on the contrary,
sometimes own up to his errors (usually when detection is certain) and appear
to be facing the consequences with singular honesty, fortitude, and manliness.
It is
indeed difficult to express how thoroughly straightforward some typical
psychopaths can appear.
Lack of remorse or shame
The
psychopath apparently cannot accept substantial blame for the various
misfortunes which befall him and which he brings down upon others, usually he
denies emphatically all responsibility and directly accuses others as
responsible, but often he will go through an idle ritual of saying that much of
his trouble is his own fault. When the
latter course is adopted, subsequent events indicate that it is empty of
sincerity-a hollow and casual form as little felt as the literal implications
of "your humble and obedient servant" are actually felt by a person
who closes a letter with such a phrase.
Although his behavior shows reactions of this sort to be perfunctory,
this is seldom apparent in his manner.
This is exceedingly deceptive and is very likely to promote confidence
and deep trust. More detailed
questioning about just what he blames himself for and why may show that a
serious attitude is not only absent but altogether inconceivable to him. If this fails, his own
actions will soon clarify the issue.
Whether
judged in the light of his conduct, of his attitude, or of material elicited in
psychiatric examination, he shows almost no sense of shame. His career is always full of exploits, any
one of which would wither even the more callous representatives of the ordinary
man. Yet he does not, despite his able
protestations, show the slightest evidence of major humiliation or regret. This is true of matters pertaining to his
personal and selfish pride and to esthetic standards that he avows as well as
to moral or humanitarian matters. If
Santayana is correct in saying that "perhaps the true dignity of man is
his ability to despise himself," the psychopath is without a means to
acquire true dignity.
Inadequately motivated antisocial
behavior
Not
only is the psychopath undependable, but also in more active ways he cheats,
deserts, annoys, brawls, fails, and lies without any apparent compunction. He will commit theft, forgery, adultery,
fraud, and other deeds for astonishingly small stakes and under much greater
risks of being discovered than will the ordinary scoundrel. He will, in fact, commit such deeds in the
absence of any apparent goal at all.
Yet
we do not find the regularity and specificity in his behavior that is apparent
in what is often called compulsive stealing or other socially destructive
actions carried out under extraordinary pressures which the subject, in varying
degrees, struggles against. Such
activities, and all disorder distinguished by some as impulse neurosis,14 as we have mentioned, probably have important
features in common with the psychopath's disorder. In contrast, his antisocial and
self-defeating deeds are not circumscribed (as, for example, in pyromania and
kleptomania), and he shows little or no evidence of the conscious conflict or
the subsequent regret that are not regularly absent in these other
manifestations. Again the comparison of
a circumscribed dissociation typical of hysteria with the general ego
disintegration of schizophrenia may be usefully cited.
Objective
stimuli (value of the object, specific conscious need) are, as in compulsive
(or impulsive) stealing, inadequate to account for the psychopath's acts. Evidence of any vividly felt urge symbolizing
a disguised but specifically channelized, instinctive
drive is not readily available in the psychopath's wide range of inappropriate
and self-defeating behavior.
Poor judgment and
failure
to learn
by experience
Despite his excellent rational powers, the psychopath continues to show
the most execrable judgment about attaining what one might presume to be his
ends. He throws away excellent
opportunities to make money, to achieve a rapprochement with his wife, to be
dismissed from the hospital, or to gain other ends that he has sometimes spent
considerable effort toward gaining. It
might be said that he cares little about financial success and little about
regaining his wife, but it is difficult indeed to say that he is not extremely
fain to get out of the psychiatric hospital where he has been locked up for
months with other patients whom he regards as "lunatics" and who are,
indeed, not desirable associates for the average man or for him. Be it noted again that the psychopath appears
as unwilling to remain in a psychiatric hospital and as impatient to regain his
freedom as would be the normal man. I have
not in these patients ever found reliable evidence that unconsciously they seek
and enjoy as punishment such confinement.
This exercise of execrable judgment is not particularly modified by
experience, however chastening his experiences may be. Few more impressive examples of this could be
offered from the records of humanity than the familiar one of the psychopath
who, in full possession of his rational faculties, has gone through the almost
indescribably distasteful confinement of many months with delusional and
disturbed psychotic patients and, after fretting and counting the days until
the time of his release, proceeds at once to get drunk and create disorder
which he thoroughly understands will cause him to be returned without delay to
the detested wards. It is my opinion
that no punishment is likely to make the psychopath change his ways. Punishment is not, of course, regarded as an
appropriate measure in medical treatment.
It is, however, often considered and administered by legal
authorities. And it must be remembered
that at present the law deals with these patients more frequently than
physicians deal with them.
Despite the extraordinarily poor judgment demonstrated in behavior, in
the actual living of his life, the psychopath characteristically demonstrates
unimpaired (sometimes excellent) judgment in appraising theoretical
situations. In complex matters of
judgment involving ethical, emotional, and other evaluational
factors, in contrast with matters requiring only (or chiefly) intellectual
reasoning ability, he also shows no evidence of a defect. So long as the test is verbal or otherwise
abstract, so long as he is not a direct participant, he shows that he knows his
way about. He can offer wise decisions
not only for others in life situations but also for himself so long as he is
asked what he would do (or should do, or is going to do). When the test of action comes to him we soon
find ample evidence of his deficiency.
Pathologic
egocentricity and
incapacity for
love
The psychopath is always distinguished by egocentricity. This is usually of a degree not seen in
ordinary people and often is little short of astonishing. How obviously this quality will be expressed
in vanity or self-esteem will vary with the shrewdness of the subject and with
his other complexities. Deeper probing
will always reveal a self-centeredness that is apparently unmodifiable
and all but complete. This can perhaps
be best expressed by stating that it is an incapacity for object love and that
this incapacity (in my experience with well-marked psychopaths) appears to be
absolute.
Terms in use for what we experience as "emotion" contain much
ambiguity, and their referential accuracy is limited. This contributes to confusion and paradox
which are difficult to avoid in attempts to convey concepts about such a
matter.
In a sense, it is absurd to maintain that the psychopath's incapacity
for object love is absolute, that is, to say he is capable of affection for
another ill literally no degree. He is
plainly capable of casual fondness, of likes and dislikes, and of reactions
that, one might say, cause others to matter to him. These affective reactions are, however,
always strictly limited in degree. In
durability they also vary greatly from what is normal in mankind. The term absolute is, I believe, appropriate
if we apply it to any affective attitude strong and meaningful enough to be
called love, that is, anything that prevails in sufficient degree and over
sufficient periods to exert a major influence on behavior.
True enough, psychopaths are sometimes skillful in pretending a love for
women or simulating parental devotion to their children. What part of this is not pure (and perhaps in
an important sense unconscious) simulation has always impressed this observer as
that other type of pseudo-love sometimes seen in very self-centered people who
are not psychopaths, which consists in concern for the other person only (or
primarily) insofar as he enhances or seems to enhance the self. Even this latter imitation of adult
affectivity has been seldom seen in the full-blown psychopath, although it is
seen frequently in those called here partial psychopaths. In non-psychopaths a familiar example is that
of the parent who lavishes money and attention on a child chiefly to bask in
the child's success and consciously or unconsciously to feel what an important
person he is because of the child's triumphs.
Although it is true that with ordinary people such motives are seldom,
if ever, unmixed, and usually some object love and some self-love are
integrated into such attitudes, in even the partial psychopath anything that
could honestly be called object love approaches the imperceptible.
What positive feelings appear during the psychopath's
interpersonal relations give a strong impression of being
self-love. Some cynical psychologists
and philosophers have, of course, challenged the existence of any love which is
not on final analysis selfish, saying that the mother who gives up her own life
for her child really does so because it would be more painful to her to see the
child perish. Without attempting to take
up the cudgels in this interesting dispute, it will suffice to say that
whatever normal and highly developed and sincere object love may actually be,
it is, whether judged behaviorally or intuitively, something that impresses the
ordinary observer as definitely unlike anything found in the psychopath.
The psychopath seldom shows anything that, if the chief facts were
known, would pass even in the eyes of lay observers as object love. His absolute indifference to the financial,
social, emotional, physical, and other hardships which he brings upon those for
whom he professes love confirms the appraisal during psychiatric studies of his
true attitude. We must, let it never be forgotten,
judge a man by his actions rather than by his words. This old saying is especially significant
when it is the man's motivations and real feelings that we are to judge. This lack in the psychopath makes it all but
impossible for an adequate emotional rapport to arise in his treatment and may
be an important factor in the therapeutic failure that, in my experience, has
been universal.
General poverty
in major
affective
reactions
In addition to his incapacity for object love, the psychopath always
shows general poverty of affect.
Although it is true that be sometimes becomes excited and shouts as if
in rage or seems to exult in enthusiasm and again weeps in what appear to be
bitter tears or speaks eloquent and mournful words about his misfortunes or his
follies, the conviction dawns on those who observe him carefully that here we
deal with a readiness of expression rather than a strength of feeling.
Vexation, spite, quick and labile flashes of quasi-affection, peevish
resentment, shallow moods of self-pity, puerile attitudes of vanity, and absurd
and showy poses of indignation are all within his emotional scale and are
freely sounded as the circumstances of life play upon him. But mature, wholehearted anger, true or
consistent indignation, honest, solid grief, sustaining pride, deep joy, and
genuine despair are reactions not likely to be found within this scale.
Specific loss of
insight
In a special sense the psychopath lacks insight to a degree seldom, if
ever, found in any but the most seriously disturbed psychotic patients. In a superficial sense, in that he can say he
is in a psychiatric hospital because of his unacceptable and strange conduct,
and by all other such criteria, his insight is intact. His insight is of course not affected at all
with the type of impairment seen in the schizophrenic patient, who may not
recognize the fact that others regard him as mentally ill but may insist that
he is the Grand Lama and now in
This is almost astonishing in view of the psychopath's perfect orientation,
his ability and willingness to reason or to go through the forms of reasoning,
and his perfect freedom from delusions and other signs of an ordinary
psychosis.
Usually, instead of facing facts that would ordinarily lead to insight,
he projects, blaming his troubles on others with the flimsiest of pretext but
with elaborate and subtle rationalization.
Occasionally, however, he will perfunctorily admit himself to blame for
everything and analyze his case from what seems to be almost a psychiatric
viewpoint, but we can see that his conclusions have little actual significance
for him.
Unresponsiveness in general
interpersonal relations
The
psychopath cannot be depended upon to show the ordinary responsiveness to
special consideration or kindness or trust.
No matter how well he is treated, no matter how long-suffering his
family, his friends, the police, hospital attendants, and others may be, he
shows no consistent reaction of appreciation except superficial and transparent
protestations. Such gestures are exhibited most frequently when he feels they
will facilitate some personal aim. The
ordinary axiom of human existence that one good turn deserves another, a
principle sometimes honored by cannibals and
uncommonly callous assassins, has only superficial validity for him although he
can cite it with eloquent casuistry when trying to obtain parole, discharge
from the hospital, or some other end.
As in
attempting to delineate other aspects of the psychopath, we find ourselves
again confronting paradox. Although he
can be counted on not to be appreciably swayed in major issues by these basic
rules, we often find him attentive in small courtesies and favors,
perhaps even habitually generous or quasi-generous when the cost is not
decisive. Occasionally his actions may
suggest profound generosity in that large sums are involved or something
presumably of real value is sacrificed.
Usually, however, these appearances are deceiving.
…In
relatively small matters psychopaths sometimes behave so as to appear very considerate,
responsive, and obliging. Acquaintances
who meet them on grounds where minor issues prevail may find it difficult to
believe that they are not highly endowed with gratitude and eager to serve
others. Such reactions and intentions,
although sometimes ready or even spectacularly facile, do not ever accumulate
sufficient force to play a determining part in really important issues...
…Outward
social graces come easy to most psychopaths, and many continue, throughout
careers disastrous to themselves and for others, to conduct themselves in
superficial relations, in handling the trivia of existence, so as to gain
admiration and gratitude. In these
surface aspects of functioning, the typical psychopath (unlike the classic
hypocrite) often seems to act with undesigning spontaneity and to be prompted
by motives of excellent quality though of marvelously
attenuated substance.
Fantastic and
uninviting behavior
with drink
and sometimes without
Although some psychopaths do not drink at all and others drink rarely,
considerable overindulgence in alcohol is very often prominent in the life
story. Delirium tremens and other
temporary psychoses directly due to alcohol were not commonly found in the
hundreds of patients observed by me.
The view of some professional moralists to the effect that demon rum is
the fundamental cause of disaster such as that of the psychopath appears to
have little claim to validity. It has
been pointed out already that an irreconcilable difference in primary aim
appears to exist between the ordinary person who drinks too much and the
psychopath. This may be restated briefly
as follows: The ordinary drinker gets into trouble by drifting with enthusiasm
into the opinion that if two or six or eight drinks have made him feel so good,
another (or two more or perhaps five more) will make him feel just so much
better. Such rationalizations may assist
the normal drinker, especially if he has serious fundamental conflicts, in a
progress toward becoming a neurotic drinker or toward an alcoholic breakdown.
I cannot say that it is impossible in certain persons for a state of
mental disorder identical with that described here as psychopathic personality
to be reached eventually in this way.
Often, however, these neurotic drinkers, in sharp contrast with the
psychopath, worry about their state when sober, are capable of making an
earnest effort to get well under psychiatric treatment, and lack most of the
deeper personality features of the psychopath.
Even in the neurotic drinker it is more often an
independent and preexisting personality maladjustment rather than the
alcohol which is primarily causal. Many
psychiatric observers make this vividly clear and no less convincing.
…A major point about the psychopath and his relation to alcohol can be
found in the shocking, fantastic, uninviting, or relatively inexplicable
behavior which emerges when he drinks - sometimes when he drinks only a
little. It is very likely that the
effects of alcohol facilitate such acts and other manifestations of the disorder.
This does not mean, however, that alcohol is fundamentally causal. Good criteria for differentiation between
psychopaths and others who drink, moderately or
excessively, can be found in what tendencies emerge after similar amounts have
been consumed.
A peculiar sort of vulgarity, domineering rudeness, petty bickering or
buffoonish quasi-maulings of wife, mistress, or
children, and quick shifts between maudlin and vainglorious moods, although
sometimes found in ordinary alcoholics with other serious patterns of disorder,
are pathognomonic of the psychopath and in him alone
reach full and precocious flower. Even
in the first stages of a spree, perhaps after taking only two or three
highballs, he may show signs of petty truculence or sullenness but seldom of
real gaiety or conviviality. Evidence of
any pleasurable reaction is characteristically minimal, as are indications that
he is seeking relief from anxiety, despair, worry, responsibility, or tension.
Alcohol, as a sort of catalyst, sometimes contributes a good deal to the
long and varied series of outlandish pranks and inanely coarse scenes with
which nearly every drinking psychopath's story is starred. Free from alcohol, such a patient would
scarcely sit under a house all night idly striking matches, or, concealing
himself behind book stacks, urinate from the window of a public library on
passersby in the street below. Nor would
he, like the psychopathic son of a prominent family, suddenly, as a prank, decide
to climb into a tree at a busy street corner, where he deliberately undressed,
shouting wildly and puerilely to draw public
attention. This man could not be
persuaded to withdraw until the local fire department was called to remove
him. The alcohol probably does not of
itself create such behavior. Alcohol is
not likely to bring out any impulse that is not already potential in a
personality, nor is it likely to cast behavior into patterns for which there is
not already significant subsurface predilection. The alcohol merely facilitates expression by
narcotizing inhibitory processes.136 In
cases of this sort very little narcotizing may be needed. The oil which lubricates the engine of an
automobile neither furnishes the energy for its progress nor directs it.
Psychopaths often indulge in these strange performances after drinking
relatively little. They know perfectly
well what they have done before when drinking and, with these facts squarely
before their altogether clear and rational awareness, decide to drink
again. It is difficult indeed for me to
see any substantial grounds for placing the responsibility for the drinking
psychopath's deeds primarily on alcohol instead of on the disorder which, in
ways no less serious even if less spectacular, he shows also when entirely
sober.
Suicide rarely
carried out
Despite the deep behavioral pattern of throwing away or destroying the
opportunities of life that underlies the psychopath's superficial self-content,
ease, charm, and often brilliance, we do not find him prone to take a final
determining step of this sort in literal suicide. Suicidal tendencies have been stressed by
some observers as prevalent. This
opinion, in all likelihood, must have come from the observation of patients
fundamentally different from our
group, but who, as we have mentioned, were traditionally classified under the
same term. It was only after a good many
years of experience with actual psychopaths that I encountered my first
authentic instance of suicide in a patient who could be called typical.
Instead of a predilection for ending their own lives, psychopaths, on
the contrary, show much more evidence of a specific and characteristic immunity
from such an act. This immunity, it must
be granted, is, like most other immunities, relative.
Although suicide, then, cannot be named an
impossibility among this group, its unlikelihood still merits strong
emphasis. Since most
psychopaths do not remain hospitalized or under other protective supervision,
the rarity of this act becomes more significant. Also worth noting is the fact that most real
psychopaths, not once or a few times but habitually, work themselves into
situations that might strongly prompt the normal man to end his own life. Since suicidal threats, like promises and
well-formulated plans to adopt a new course, are so frequently offered by these
patients, there is good reason to keep in mind the fact that they are nearly
always empty. Many bogus attempts are
made, sometimes with remarkable cleverness, premeditation, and histrionics.
Sex life
impersonal, trivial, and
poorly
integrated
The psychopath's sex life invariably shows peculiarities. The opinion has already been expressed that
homosexuality and the other specific deviations, though of course occurring in
psychopaths, are not sufficiently common to be regarded as characteristic. Evidence of consistent, well-formulated
deviation was extremely rare in a large group of male psychopaths personally observed
in a closed psychiatric institution. Among male and female subjects seen as outpatients and in general
hospitals, such complications, though more frequent, do not seem to be a
distinguishing feature. If we
take another viewpoint and consider the group who come or are sent to the
physician primarily for sexual deviation, we find again some patients with
behavior patterns resembling in various degrees that of the real
psychopath. These patients are probably
not typical of the deviate group as a whole, whose members much more frequently
show different fundamental patterns of adjustment and maladjustment.
Unmistakable psychopaths who do not show evidence of strong or
consistent deviated impulses but who nevertheless occasionally carry out
abnormal sexual acts have been seen much more often than those in whom the two
fundamental patterns seem to overlap.
This is not surprising in view of the psychopath's notable tendencies to
hit upon unsatisfactory conduct in all fields and his apparent inability to take
seriously what would to others be repugnant and regrettable. The real homosexual seeking an outlet for his
own impulses often finds it possible to engage the psychopath in deviated
activities, sometimes for petty rewards, sometimes for what might best be
called just the hell of it.
It has been said that some people whose sexual activities are normal
under ordinary circumstances may, in the absence of normal opportunities,
resort to immature or abnormal practices as a substitutive measure. It is not hard to believe that a man of
orthodox sexuality, if stranded and alone for years on an uninhabited island, might develop impulses toward masturbation. Some studies of prisoners give the impression
that mutual masturbation and far more abnormal relations occur in persons who,
when not confined, sought only heterosexual intercourse.184,296 Surely
every psychiatrist has seen people whose sexual aims are usually directed
toward the other sex but whose orientation is so confused, and whose evaluation
of sexual experience is so trivial, that they sometimes also engage in
homosexual and other types of abnormal relations.
In psychopaths and in many other people who cannot be correctly placed
with the well-defined homosexual group, there are varying degrees of
susceptibility or inclination to immature or deviated sex practices. In contrast with others, the psychopath
requires impulses of scarcely more than whimlike
intensity to bring about unacceptable behavior in the sexual field or in any
other. Even the faintest or most
fleeting notion or inclination to forge a check, to steal his uncle's watch, to
see if he can seduce his best friend's wife, or to have a little fling at
fellatio, is by no means unlikely to emerge as the deed. The sort of repugnance or other inhibiting
force that would prevent any or all such impulses from being followed (or
perhaps from even becoming conscious impulses) in another person is not a
factor that can be counted on to play much part in the psychopath's decisions.
As might be expected, in view of their incapacity for object love, the
sexual aims of psychopaths do not seem to include any important personality
relations or any recognizable desire or ability to explore or possess or
significantly ravish the partner in a shared experience. Their positive activities are consistently
and parsimoniously limited to literal physical contact and relatively free of
the enormous emotional concomitants and the complex potentialities that make
adult love relations an experience so thrilling and indescribable. Consequently they seem to regard sexual
activity very casually, sometimes apparently finding it less shocking and
enthralling than a sensitive normal man would find even the glance of his
beloved.
Failure to follow any life plan
The psychopath shows a striking inability to follow any
sort of life plan consistently, whether it be one
regarded as good or evil. He does not
maintain an effort toward any far goal at all. This is entirely applicable to
the full psychopath. On the contrary, he
seems to go out of his way to make a failure of life. By some incomprehensible and untempting piece of folly or buffoonery, he eventually cuts
short any activity in which he is succeeding, no matter whether it is crime or
honest endeavor. At the behest of
trivial impulses he repeatedly addresses himself directly to folly. In the more seriously affected examples, it
is impossible for wealthy, influential, and devoted relatives to place the
psychopath in any position, however ingeniously it may be chosen, where he will
not succeed eventually in failing with spectacular and bizarre splendor. Considering a longitudinal section of his
life, his behavior gives such an impression of gratuitous folly and nonsensical
activity in such massive accumulation that it is hard to avoid the conclusion
that here is the product of true madness - of madness in a sense quite as real
as that conveyed to the imaginative layman by the terrible word lunatic. With the further consideration that all this
skein of apparent madness has been woven by a person of (technically) unimpaired
and superior intellectual powers and universally regarded as sane, the surmise
intrudes that we are confronted by a serious and unusual type of genuine
abnormality. Not merely a surmise but a
strong conviction may arise that this apparent sanity is, in some important
respects, a sanity in name only. When we consider his actual performance,
evidence of mental competency is sorely lacking. We find instead a spectacle that suggests
madness in excelsis, despite the absence of all those
symptoms that enable us, in some degree, to account for irrational conduct in
the psychotic.
Hervey Cleckley, M.D., The Mask of Sanity~An Attempt to
Clarify Some Issues About the So-Called Psychopathic Personality, first
published 1941, this edition 1988. (Available to download from www.cassiopaea.org/)