Personality Cafe banner
21 - 40 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,923 Posts
Serial killers are an enigma. They almost all have an antisocial personality disorder with narcissistic and/or sadistic traits, and share a few other things in common: usually male, usually from low-income backgrounds, and usually have endured or witnessed abuse/violence at a young age. (There are exceptions to all of these, of course: Aileen Wuornos was a female killer with a borderline personality disorder, and certain killers such as Dennis Rader had relatively normal upbringings.)

Serial killers vary in MOs. Some kill their victims quickly (including David Berkowitz, or the "Son of Sam"), others take their time, often prolonging their torture and abuse over hours or even days (such as Leonard Lake and Charles Ng). Some work alone, others in duos or groups.

Serial killers vary in motive as well. Many serial killers are lust killers; that is, the act of killing and/or torturing provides them with sexual satisfaction - or they engage in sexual assault and feel no remorse killing as a means to discard evidence. Other killers are what many call "thrill killers"; they kill for the sense of adventure and for the adrenaline rush with which killing provides them. Thrill killers include Ivan Milat and Charles Sobhraj.
Others still have no discernible motive other than that killing simply calms them, like scratching an itch. Coral Watts might be this type of killer, as may be Sailson Jose de Gracas, who was arrested recently and confessed to over 40 murders. It is debatable as to whether or not killers who murder for financial reasons (e.g., Dorothea Puente, who killed for social security checks, or Richard Kuklinski, who was a hitman) can be considered serial killers, as their primary motive is not psychological.

One thing that has been observed in PET scans and fMRIs of antisocial personalities is that they are lacking in vital parts of the brain that allow them to see the "big picture" - they have difficulty seeing the patterns and possibilities required to process the consequences of their actions. They also tend to be unnaturally fearless and reckless for these reasons.

There is much more I could discuss, but right now I'd like to focus on the issue of organized vs. disorganized serial killers. Disorganized serial killers strike at random, whenever they need to act on their impulses. They often carry no consistent MO (which may work in their favor, in terms of predictability). Organized serial killers tend to plan their crimes in advance, and also tend to use similar methods each time, often involving torture. They tend to be slightly more intelligent than their disorganized counterparts.

Disclaimer: Honestly speaking, it isn't entirely proper to assign MBTI types to people with personality disorders, especially those with ASPD. They simply do not possess remotely normal psychologies. So, I want to make one thing clear: the individuals to whom I will assign certain types in this post are obviously not representative of the population of that type as a whole.

For the disorganized serial killer, I have done some research on Richard Ramirez, often called the "Night Stalker." He demonstrates qualities of an ESTP. For the organized serial killer, I have read up on Ted Bundy, the gold standard of American psychopaths. He most closely resembles an ESTJ.

Ramirez was brutal, speedy, and random; Bundy was meticulous, detailed, and methodical. Both, shockingly, had legions of female fans. Both also racked high body counts: Ramirez killed at least 14 people and Bundy at least 30.
I have provided brief summaries of each, explaining their similarities and differences. I hope that those of you with morbid fascinations for this kind of thing find it interesting.
but what's your point? Many of these people aren't just serial killers, they are also sufferers of intense psychological trauma that caused them to act out in that way. Same thing with war veterans. That sounds grotesque to compare them, but that is the nature of the world we live in.

There are many potential serial killers in our world, and there is nothing that MBTI can do to stop that. Because MBTI is about analysing human beings, and they are of course, human beings. They are so human, that they have tremendous human related problems. (like an extreme fight or flight reaction, or a deep need to satisfy ones own survival needs . These are obvious responses to TRAUMA in any human being)

anyway, you will find a serial killer in each MBTI type. I assure you that, just as criminal history is not confined to one type, or just like brain circuitry problems is not confined to one single type.

Besides, there is no point in analysing the personality of someone who has a brain which is malnourished or injured by trauma. as merely understanding the run off in a sewage drain, will not give you the source of the rain. You will not get the entire picture but only one segment of it.


My guess is that most mass murders/serial killers that are able to evade capture for decades are pathological liars.
.

It's not a guess .it's close to a fact. Serial killers generally posses some form of personality disorder, and are psychopaths. Especially Narcissistic personality, antisocial personality, mixed with a criminal history or grounds for a criminal history, can lead to that level of psychopathy, and it's really the first instance of crimínal history that sets off the murder switch. (Due to moral boundaries being destroyed)


Narcisstic pd sufferers are by nature, pathological liars as they have a sense of denial over anything that goes against their high horse type image (which survived them through trauma), and antisocial personality disorder sufferers tend to be liars in their view that everything is some form of game. You get a serial killer if either personality disorder coexists and they no longer respect others moral boundaries, and when they star this destructive cycle is just a matter of chance and responses from ones environment.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
573 Posts
Discussion Starter · #22 ·
We could say that no person has a personality in that case. Values, convictions, and empathy don't make a personality. There are plenty of people with few or no values, convictions, and empathy who are not in fact serial killers. I don't understand your point at all.
You're missing the point - it's not about serial killers specifically, but psychopaths on a larger scale.

No point arguing functions if you don't believe in functions. But I would disagree with this interpretation of Extroverted Feeling.
And that's the whole problem with cognitive functions. Anyone can define them, anyone can "interpret" them however they want - there's little agreement between various websites on what each function actually is, and there's zero empirical evidence to prove any of it. Anyone can simply define a cognitive function to mean what (s)he wants, and then use it to justify a typing.

I don't see him as a Te-dom. I'm pretty sure his response to evidence was pretty much: "Why are you bringing this up?" I distinctly remember reading an interview where someone mentioned 'They found these objects in your car' and he said 'Now, that's not quite fair to say'. A Fe response (not socially appropriate!) not Te (your evidence is wrong!) I think if he'd been a Te-dom there would have been a lot more...playing with the facts. Throwing out opposing evidence, questioning the logic of the case against him. Instead he gravitated towards convincing people that he was a great guy, all-American boy, trying to gain sympathy. Te gravitates towards logical facts, Fe gravitates towards emotional 'facts'.
Again - this was all part of his cleverly crafted persona to appear normal and innocent. It wasn't a genuine emotional reaction as much as, like you said, an attempt to convince people that he was a great guy. It was completely disingenuous, whereas an actual Fe user would have actually been sincere about caring about social norms (according to the

I was not referring to the content of what he said but the manner he phrased it, which was Fe-Ni. "This is unequivocally going to happen", with a strong value, people-oriented swing to it, it has something of the manner of a politician trying to suade through emotional means.
Same point as above. Psychopaths can adapt. What matters is if its genuine. Any politician can word things in a way that sounds people-oriented and value-based. Not many sincerely believe it - they do it for ulterior motives. Just like Bundy.

Well, he likely had ASPD. I don't think empathy or lack thereof should determine type.
That's a very large part of the "F" letter. Whether or not one prefers to take others' emotions into consideration or simply act by his/her own logic. Not to mention that statistically, psychopaths strongly lean "T" when they take the test. Source: http://www.uccs.edu/Documents/dsega...igation-Jungs-types-and-PD-features-JPT-2.pdf

(Also, assuming that only N types can build a "game plan" and "foresee consequences" leads me to refer you to this page: On the Bias against Sensation | CelebrityTypes)

I think control over the environment is much more Se than Te
According to several pages including this one (though, honestly, none of these pages are any more reliable than a tumblr blog), Se is all about experiencing and adapting to the external environment, not controlling it. I did link you a page that described Te as being more control-focused, but of course, you can just "disagree with that interpretation."

Si isn't memory though. Very objective memory is probably Se. Either way anyone can have a good or bad memory.
This page specifically links Si with "remembered facts and life experiences." Bundy became more meticulous over time, using his personal experience to bolster his cleverness when it came to his kills, consistent with what this page says about the function.

For the reasons above, and other reasons as well, I just don't give credence to the cognitive functions. I'm arguing with them here because, well, people on this site prefer to talk about them, and I've sort of gotten used to using them in discussion. At the end of the day, though, the individual letters matter to me the most - and all the evidence points to Bundy being anything but an F type, far from an N type, and more organized and structured (J) than spontaneous (P).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,923 Posts
You're missing the point - it's not about serial killers specifically, but psychopaths on a larger scale.



And that's the whole problem with cognitive functions. Anyone can define them, anyone can "interpret" them however they want - there's little agreement between various websites on what each function actually is, and there's zero empirical evidence to prove any of it. Anyone can simply define a cognitive function to mean what (s)he wants, and then use it to justify a typing.



Again - this was all part of his cleverly crafted persona to appear normal and innocent. It wasn't a genuine emotional reaction as much as, like you said, an attempt to convince people that he was a great guy. It was completely disingenuous, whereas an actual Fe user would have actually been sincere about caring about social norms (according to the



Same point as above. Psychopaths can adapt. What matters is if its genuine. Any politician can word things in a way that sounds people-oriented and value-based. Not many sincerely believe it - they do it for ulterior motives. Just like Bundy.



That's a very large part of the "F" letter. Whether or not one prefers to take others' emotions into consideration or simply act by his/her own logic. Not to mention that statistically, psychopaths strongly lean "T" when they take the test. Source: http://www.uccs.edu/Documents/dsega...igation-Jungs-types-and-PD-features-JPT-2.pdf

(Also, assuming that only N types can build a "game plan" and "foresee consequences" leads me to refer you to this page: On the Bias against Sensation | CelebrityTypes)



According to several pages including this one (though, honestly, none of these pages are any more reliable than a tumblr blog), Se is all about experiencing and adapting to the external environment, not controlling it. I did link you a page that described Te as being more control-focused, but of course, you can just "disagree with that interpretation."



This page specifically links Si with "remembered facts and life experiences." Bundy became more meticulous over time, using his personal experience to bolster his cleverness when it came to his kills, consistent with what this page says about the function.

For the reasons above, and other reasons as well, I just don't give credence to the cognitive functions. I'm arguing with them here because, well, people on this site prefer to talk about them, and I've sort of gotten used to using them in discussion. At the end of the day, though, the individual letters matter to me the most - and all the evidence points to Bundy being anything but an F type, far from an N type, and more organized and structured (J) than spontaneous (P).
I also don't agree Bundy is ENFJ. He is more ESTJ .

Having a family and being sociable seemed like a narcissistic plan of gathering self benefits, (all these things stand to benefit his image or his other ulterior motives). I think it is more of this plan of benefiting oneself that was was allowing him to be sociable and a people person, more than anything else.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
573 Posts
Discussion Starter · #24 ·
I also don't agree Bundy is ENFJ. He is more ESTJ .

Having a family and being sociable seemed like a narcissistic plan of gathering self benefits, (all these things stand to benefit his image or his other ulterior motives). I think it is more of this plan of benefiting oneself that was was allowing him to be sociable and a people person, more than anything else.
Exactly. Of course, he had ASPD, so assigning him any type is a little silly (and part of me regrets doing so at the beginning of this thread for that reason - perhaps I should have just talked about killers in general without bringing MBTI into it), but I'd say he most closely resembles an ESTJ for these reasons.

Edit: I think another factor is that many on this site find it hard to believe that intelligent, calculating, and/or clever people can be S types. But a quick look at the CT page for ESTJs reveals that quite a few ESTJs are very intelligent and/or calculating:
http://www.celebritytypes.com/estj.php
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,923 Posts
Exactly. Of course, he had ASPD, so assigning him any type is a little silly (and part of me regrets doing so at the beginning of this thread for that reason - perhaps I should have just talked about killers in general without bringing MBTI into it), but I'd say he most closely resembles an ESTJ for these reasons.

Edit: I think another factor is that many on this site find it hard to believe that intelligent, calculating, and/or clever people can be S types. But a quick look at the CT page for ESTJs reveals that quite a few ESTJs are very intelligent and/or calculating:
Famous ESTJs - CelebrityTypes.com

Agreed. goîng down the Nobel Laureates list, a lot of them could very well be ESTJs or ISTJs. I think the Nobel prize winner who found out that the universe is ever accelerating is also an ESTJ.

it's like when people think SFs aren't great thinkers, but most of them tend to be highly influential and successful as thinkers in many different fields.
 

·
Queen of Hearts
Joined
·
17,939 Posts
Again - this was all part of his cleverly crafted persona to appear normal and innocent. It wasn't a genuine emotional reaction as much as, like you said, an attempt to convince people that he was a great guy. It was completely disingenuous, whereas an actual Fe user would have actually been sincere about caring about social norms (according to the
What is 'sincerely caring about social norms'? Fe can accept or reject social norms, manipulate emotions, values, etc. in the exact same way that Te can accept or reject facts, and manipulate external logic.



Same point as above. Psychopaths can adapt. What matters is if its genuine. Any politician can word things in a way that sounds people-oriented and value-based. Not many sincerely believe it - they do it for ulterior motives. Just like Bundy.
MBTI isn't about motives though. It's about cognitive structure.

That's a very large part of the "F" letter. Whether or not one prefers to take others' emotions into consideration or simply act by his/her own logic. Not to mention that statistically, psychopaths strongly lean "T" when they take the test. Source: http://www.uccs.edu/Documents/dsega...igation-Jungs-types-and-PD-features-JPT-2.pdf
If we're going off the dichotomies, sure. But this implies a choice, you know, one day I could choose to act on emotion, the next day, on logic. Emotion vs logic isn't very meaningful.
Fe does not require any sort of emotional depth or breadth. Emotions are...well, emotions. And empathy is only a very small section of the whole spectrum of human feeling, I don't see why possessing or not possessing empathy would be a good indicator of type.

(Also, assuming that only N types can build a "game plan" and "foresee consequences" leads me to refer you to this page: On the Bias against Sensation | CelebrityTypes)
I think you misunderstood me. My point is that Ni tends into the future in a single mass , and then branch off, in the moment, with Se, whereas Ne branches into the future, sees the various options, and then operates towards the intended point singularly with Si. Si-Ne preemptively troubleshoots, Ni-Se develops a specific game-plan and then improvises in the moment as need be.


According to several pages including this one (though, honestly, none of these pages are any more reliable than a tumblr blog), Se is all about experiencing and adapting to the external environment, not controlling it. I did link you a page that described Te as being more control-focused, but of course, you can just "disagree with that interpretation."
The thing is, every extroverted function is somehow controlling, as well as soaking in. Fe takes in and manipulates emotions and values, Te takes in and manipulates facts and external logic, Se takes in and manipulates physical experience and the environment, Ne takes in and manipulates ideas and speculations. It's the language they operate in. High-up Se users tend to be good at athletics and artistic pursuits because they can easily comprehend the movement of objects in space and use that to their advantage. It can be highly competitive and controlling in a physical, immediate sense.

This page specifically links Si with "remembered facts and life experiences." Bundy became more meticulous over time, using his personal experience to bolster his cleverness when it came to his kills, consistent with what this page says about the function.
Based on this definition of Si, every single human being is an SJ. Everyone learns from past experiences. Everyone remembers past experiences.
Besides, Bundy did not slowly become more meticulous with his killings. He quickly became more disorganized and less cautious, which is why he got caught in the first place.

For the reasons above, and other reasons as well, I just don't give credence to the cognitive functions. I'm arguing with them here because, well, people on this site prefer to talk about them, and I've sort of gotten used to using them in discussion. At the end of the day, though, the individual letters matter to me the most - and all the evidence points to Bundy being anything but an F type, far from an N type, and more organized and structured (J) than spontaneous (P).
Probably silly for me to argue the cog functions with someone who does not believe in them. IMO the letters hold little worth. Most people vacillate between being extroverted/introverted, logical/emotional, sensory/intuitory, organized/spontaneous throughout their life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mushr00m

·
Banned
Joined
·
573 Posts
Discussion Starter · #27 · (Edited)
What is 'sincerely caring about social norms'? Fe can accept or reject social norms, manipulate emotions, values, etc. in the exact same way that Te can accept or reject facts, and manipulate external logic.
Not quite what I was saying. You can take an Fe user who inherently extroverts feeling, and a non-Fe user who acts just like an Fe user in order to gain votes, or gain trust, but who does not naturally prefer acting in such a way. You might argue that there's no difference between the two, but that contradicts your own statement that type is about "cognitive structures." Speaking of which...

MBTI isn't about motives though. It's about cognitive structure.
And looking solely to behavior to determine cognitive structure while ignoring why someone might be acting a certain way, and whether or not someone naturally prefers to act that way is naive. Tina Fey (INTP) does not automatically become an ESFJ when impersonating Sarah Palin. Similarly, Bundy does not become an Fe user just because he imitates one for the purposes of coming off as human in interviews.

If we're going off the dichotomies, sure. But this implies a choice, you know, one day I could choose to act on emotion, the next day, on logic. Emotion vs logic isn't very meaningful.
That's a strawman and not what I was saying. But cognitive functions actually make that dichotomy worse. If I'm an ENTJ at 51%-49% J/P, the theory of cognitive functions still tells me I have a lot of Te and no Ti, even though each letter is a multi-layered gradient. Instead of changing one letter, the difference is four entire functions.

Bundy did not slowly become more meticulous with his killings. He quickly became more disorganized and less cautious, which is why he got caught in the first place.
Yes and no. Initially, his killings were simple. Over time, he planned more and became more meticulous. Eventually, however, he became so overconfident that he slipped up.

Probably silly for me to argue the cog functions with someone who does not believe in them. IMO the letters hold little worth. Most people vacillate between being extroverted/introverted, logical/emotional, sensory/intuitory, organized/spontaneous throughout their life.
If you believe in the cognitive functions, then they're no more or less important than the letters, considering one's four-letter type directly spells out four clear, ordered cognitive functions. Yes, people do change - and that's all the more reason to believe that cognitive functions (if they do exist at all) would also change. But I'm inclined also to believe that the individual letters themselves - such as introversion/extroversion, organization/adaptability - fluctuate, but generally hover around certain levels.

Anyway, unless you can provide peer-reviewed longitudinal empirical studies demonstrating the validity (as well as clear definitions!) of the cognitive functions, this argument isn't really worth continuing.
 

·
Queen of Hearts
Joined
·
17,939 Posts
Anyway, unless you can provide peer-reviewed longitudinal empirical studies demonstrating the validity (as well as clear definitions!) of the cognitive functions, this argument isn't really worth continuing.
Not a Te user; not gonna happen))
 

·
Birdie Borracho
Joined
·
9,380 Posts
You're missing the point - it's not about serial killers specifically, but psychopaths on a larger scale.
Let's talk psychopaths. As one PerC's resident psychopaths it is my duty to give a first hand perspective. This is in reply to everyone, although I like this sentence of yours, in particular. I clicked on this link because I knew the topic would come up. As far as serial killers go, I don't care for them. I think they're pathetic, whiny, and I'm glad they're dead. If I'm a psychopath, why would I be "against" serial killers?

First off, any person who isn't a comatose vegetable, is going to use cognitive functions. A common argument I see, in many forums, is that psychos/socios do not have a personality type. After all, MBTI only covers normal people. If you're incapable of understand that no person is definitively normal, then stick to DISC theory. I even have tertiary Fe, which is a cognitive judgment, rather than an emotion. I usually can appreciate being socially appropriate and not interjecting combative values into a social circle. My Ti is stronger, however, so sometimes I don't care if I'm appropriate. Emotionally, I do not relate to people and certain "emotions" I might have are usually just narcissistic pleasures. Cognitively, I can "empathize" or rationally understand that a person might be distressed. I might offer to help for my own personal satisfaction. I often pretend I'm an actual psychologist and I treat helping someone seriously, like a professional would. The difference is I don't emotionally care if my impact is negative nor do I believe I am accountable for advice I give. I'm a natural and I enjoy psychology. Tell me I'm wrong, I'll say don't care. Moving on...

Primary vs. secondary psychopathy - St. Petersburg Mental Health | Examiner.com
What exactly is a psychopath? Unfortunately, "there is no common consensus of opinion as to the construct and symptomology relating to "psychopathy" as a diagnostic entity." The closest we can come to a straightforward, commmonly accepted concept of a psychopath is the DSM-IV's definition of APD, or antisocial personality disorder(Gowlett, 2014). Such a person exhibits 'a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood.' Some consider APD and psychopathy synonymous. Hare distinguishes the two, however, arguing that "criminal behaviour is central to the construct of APD, whereas psychopathy is a set of personality traits that can lead to criminality..."(Gowlett, 2014). Some favor a diagnosis of psychopathy since "it not only takes into account an individual's behaviour but also their personality"(Gowlett, 2014) Just because you don't go around killing people, in other words, does not mean that you are not a constitutional psychopath.
Oftentimes, a condition and a resulting disorder are mixed-up as one and the same. For example, I "have" ADHD. Realistically, I am a type 7 ENTP and ADHD can manifest as a disorder. My cognitive processing and neurology is innate, but ADHD is situational. In the same way, a person can be a psychopath without having ASPD. I had a relatively mild childhood, a good loving mother & step-dad, and a loving in his own way Narcissistic father. The latter might have contributed to genetics, although nothing is for certain. The point is, I never had a reason to NOT develop empathy, but I would say my emotional depth has not changed since I was 6 or 7. Essentially, I would argue that primary psychopathy is caused by a lack of neurological growth that facilitates emotional maturity. How I discovered I have the brain of a psychopath | James Fallon | Comment is free | The Guardian

There's an old adage that psychos are born and socios are made. I would agree with this, for the sake of establishing semantics and the need for heroes and villains to have an origin story. By the time both types reach 25 (I'm 26) the differences aren't that important. If we've stayed out of jail, we can probably continue to do so.
Psychopaths Among Us, by Robert Hercz
And it's really just beginning. Psychopathy may prove to be as important a construct in this century as IQ was in the last (and just as susceptible to abuse), because, thanks to Hare, we now understand that the great majority of psychopaths are not violent criminals and never will be. Hundreds of thousands of psychopaths live and work and prey among us. Your boss, your boyfriend, your mother could be what Hare calls a "subclinical" psychopath, someone who leaves a path of destruction and pain without a single pang of conscience.
Other articles estimate 1% of the population are psychopaths (Born) and 2-3% are sociopaths (Made). Even then, it's probably on a spectrum. If 3% were regularly commiting violent crime, would the world not be in complete chaos? Most of aren't, because we do not see the need to do so. Because I had a healthy childhood, I'm not prone to criminal behavior. Personally, I'll acknowledge that I've screwed many people over, and the truth is I don't even notice unless I think about it. Even then, I'm reminisce for psychological purposes, as well as because life is easier when people like me. So I do try to live a relatively non-destructive life, simply because that life is easier and living 'fast & loose' can be tiresome.

The other key component with serial killers is the narcissist element, which is also found in cluster B. Personally, I believe a narcissist can have sociopathic/aspd traits and a psycho/socio can be narcissistic. I would also say that a person can be one and have little traits of the other. I used to be more narcissistic. My life is still completely self-centered, but I no longer need "narc supply" and my actual ego is still fresh, but healthier than the false ego I used to have. Contrast that with serial killers who allow their own delusions of grandeur to mix with lack of empathy/impulse control. Earlier, I described myself as an emotional 6 year old. Imagine a 2-3 year old who is "My way or the highway". If that toddler doesn't develop emotionally, but does so cognitively, is that not what a psychopath is? I'd say that's the more extreme psychopaths who are incapable of any emotion at all and cannot understand the concept of punishment. I'm a least stuck in the stage where life is a game, but I'm aware that I don't "want to get in trouble".

So why do serial killers suck? Because the killing was done as a means of personal gratification/sadistic need. I prefer to live more utilitarian than that. I don't see myself having to kill, but I would do so if it served a purpose, like self-preservation. I'd probably be disturbed for 30 seconds, and then shake it off. The 1000 yard stare you all see in court, is because what is done is done. If I screw something up, I move on. Perhaps psychopath has a correlation with types 7 & 8? (They seriously probably do) So sure, John Wayne Gacy was smart, cunning, and prepared. But I'd call him a dumb fuck for losing control of himself. I have the same lapses in judgment, sometimes, although it doesn't involve killing a fornicating a corpse.

Final thought. Perhaps type does play into how a psychopath and/or ASPD sees those traits manifest? Perhaps Ramirez and Bundy sought the physical sensation of control. Personally, I love being able to dissect someone's personality, to their face, and intuitively revealing all their flaws. I especially enjoy doing this to narcissists. Bundy wanted to see the last breathes too feel powerful. I suppose I do the same, occasionally, with the mind. There is something beautiful about seeing a person's soul, complete with the mix of purity and grime. It just has to be dissected first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dangerose

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,923 Posts
Let's talk psychopaths. As one PerC's resident psychopaths it is my duty to give a first hand perspective. This is in reply to everyone, although I like this sentence of yours, in particular. I clicked on this link because I knew the topic would come up. As far as serial killers go, I don't care for them. I think they're pathetic, whiny, and I'm glad they're dead. If I'm a psychopath, why would I be "against" serial killers?

First off, any person who isn't a comatose vegetable, is going to use cognitive functions. A common argument I see, in many forums, is that psychos/socios do not have a personality type. After all, MBTI only covers normal people. If you're incapable of understand that no person is definitively normal, then stick to DISC theory. I even have tertiary Fe, which is a cognitive judgment, rather than an emotion. I usually can appreciate being socially appropriate and not interjecting combative values into a social circle. My Ti is stronger, however, so sometimes I don't care if I'm appropriate. Emotionally, I do not relate to people and certain "emotions" I might have are usually just narcissistic pleasures. Cognitively, I can "empathize" or rationally understand that a person might be distressed. I might offer to help for my own personal satisfaction. I often pretend I'm an actual psychologist and I treat helping someone seriously, like a professional would. The difference is I don't emotionally care if my impact is negative nor do I believe I am accountable for advice I give. I'm a natural and I enjoy psychology. Tell me I'm wrong, I'll say don't care. Moving on...

Primary vs. secondary psychopathy - St. Petersburg Mental Health | Examiner.com


Oftentimes, a condition and a resulting disorder are mixed-up as one and the same. For example, I "have" ADHD. Realistically, I am a type 7 ENTP and ADHD can manifest as a disorder. My cognitive processing and neurology is innate, but ADHD is situational. In the same way, a person can be a psychopath without having ASPD. I had a relatively mild childhood, a good loving mother & step-dad, and a loving in his own way Narcissistic father. The latter might have contributed to genetics, although nothing is for certain. The point is, I never had a reason to NOT develop empathy, but I would say my emotional depth has not changed since I was 6 or 7. Essentially, I would argue that primary psychopathy is caused by a lack of neurological growth that facilitates emotional maturity. How I discovered I have the brain of a psychopath | James Fallon | Comment is free | The Guardian

There's an old adage that psychos are born and socios are made. I would agree with this, for the sake of establishing semantics and the need for heroes and villains to have an origin story. By the time both types reach 25 (I'm 26) the differences aren't that important. If we've stayed out of jail, we can probably continue to do so.
Psychopaths Among Us, by Robert Hercz

Other articles estimate 1% of the population are psychopaths (Born) and 2-3% are sociopaths (Made). Even then, it's probably on a spectrum. If 3% were regularly commiting violent crime, would the world not be in complete chaos? Most of aren't, because we do not see the need to do so. Because I had a healthy childhood, I'm not prone to criminal behavior. Personally, I'll acknowledge that I've screwed many people over, and the truth is I don't even notice unless I think about it. Even then, I'm reminisce for psychological purposes, as well as because life is easier when people like me. So I do try to live a relatively non-destructive life, simply because that life is easier and living 'fast & loose' can be tiresome.

The other key component with serial killers is the narcissist element, which is also found in cluster B. Personally, I believe a narcissist can have sociopathic/aspd traits and a psycho/socio can be narcissistic. I would also say that a person can be one and have little traits of the other. I used to be more narcissistic. My life is still completely self-centered, but I no longer need "narc supply" and my actual ego is still fresh, but healthier than the false ego I used to have. Contrast that with serial killers who allow their own delusions of grandeur to mix with lack of empathy/impulse control. Earlier, I described myself as an emotional 6 year old. Imagine a 2-3 year old who is "My way or the highway". If that toddler doesn't develop emotionally, but does so cognitively, is that not what a psychopath is? I'd say that's the more extreme psychopaths who are incapable of any emotion at all and cannot understand the concept of punishment. I'm a least stuck in the stage where life is a game, but I'm aware that I don't "want to get in trouble".

So why do serial killers suck? Because the killing was done as a means of personal gratification/sadistic need. I prefer to live more utilitarian than that. I don't see myself having to kill, but I would do so if it served a purpose, like self-preservation. I'd probably be disturbed for 30 seconds, and then shake it off. The 1000 yard stare you all see in court, is because what is done is done. If I screw something up, I move on. Perhaps psychopath has a correlation with types 7 & 8? (They seriously probably do) So sure, John Wayne Gacy was smart, cunning, and prepared. But I'd call him a dumb fuck for losing control of himself. I have the same lapses in judgment, sometimes, although it doesn't involve killing a fornicating a corpse.

Final thought. Perhaps type does play into how a psychopath and/or ASPD sees those traits manifest? Perhaps Ramirez and Bundy sought the physical sensation of control. Personally, I love being able to dissect someone's personality, to their face, and intuitively revealing all their flaws. I especially enjoy doing this to narcissists. Bundy wanted to see the last breathes too feel powerful. I suppose I do the same, occasionally, with the mind. There is something beautiful about seeing a person's soul, complete with the mix of purity and grime. It just has to be dissected first.
I agree with your point .
Psychopathy (a recognized psychiatric problem, just like borderline, avoidant etc) is not the same as being a serial killer or someone who is a serial killer about to be unlocked into one. Moreso, serial killers are chance occurrences in a population, everything that has happened in their life along with the responses they choose to take have allowed them to develop into the person that they are.

Same with borderline (Jeffrey Dahmer) and that kid who went on a shooting spree aimed at girls - he had aspergers.

However, most of the terrifying serial killers such as Bundy have come from traumatic pasts, a criminal history, antisocial traits and narcissistic personality traits. It's because they can sift through the system with such tendencies of the psychiatric illness (i.e. Pathological lying) that have allowed them to conjure up such an alarming record of murders without much persons around them or society realising.
When you have a triad of illnesses and societal problems like that ,it can be difficult for others to detect it until it comes to a point where it is too late to do anything for yourself and others.

It has nothing to do with psychopathy causing serial killers or anything like that though, it's just when the possibility of a psychopath turning into a serial killer happens, it can lead to some of the most tragic results compared to other types of serial killers.

before we said something that supports this argument, ESTJs may despite being considered to not be calculable by societal norms, ESTJs could very well be some of the most calculable and intelligent people in the world. Same with psychopaths, I'm sure there are quite a lot of them in the spotlight, on the Nobel prize laureates list and running the biggest businesses and political governments at this very moment. Who's going to say "I'm a psychopath!" . Not much people with that illness will admit it, and those that don't generally tend to cause the most trouble. Just like any other illness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
Psychopaths have no empathy and their only emotions are "proto-emotions"- really primitive responses needed for survival. When psychopaths describe their crimes, they say it in the same way we would if we were just collecting water or food. When you hook up their brains, they react neurologically to words such as "rape" or "murder" the same way as when they here words like "tree".

When I think of a psychopath's "type" the first thing that comes to mind is a really messed up xxTP, appearing charming on the surface (low Fe) while concealing a hidden agenda (Ti). I don't think it would be possible to be a psychopath and have any Fi, even as a shadow function. They do not form attachments or have any empathy/core values.
 

·
Birdie Borracho
Joined
·
9,380 Posts
Psychopaths have no empathy and their only emotions are "proto-emotions"- really primitive responses needed for survival.
According to whom? I agree with the empathy and would say the emotions are more childish. A primitive instinct might fit some, but can I psychopath not be sad, happy, or angry. Certainly the last one applies, but even if they aren't as deep as a normal person, a psychopath can still be sad about something and be happy in situations. Sure, I might view a friend like you view your favorite shirt, but that is still some emotion, right? It might not be "good" enough, but I can't change it nor can I feel bad enough to change it. It is what it is.

When psychopaths describe their crimes, they say it in the same way we would if we were just collecting water or food. When you hook up their brains, they react neurologically to words such as "rape" or "murder" the same way as when they here words like "tree".
Psychopath really does cover a broad spectrum. I, too, don't have a strong reaction to those words. But the extent might be even deeper with the criminal psychopaths who are more desensitized than sub-clinical psychopaths. Remember, those tests are done on people who are psychotic just as much a psychopath. High-function psychopaths and sociopaths are rarely tested, because we generally do not seek therapy. The issue is with empathy not sanity. I'm not broken, just different.

When I think of a psychopath's "type" the first thing that comes to mind is a really messed up xxTP, appearing charming on the surface (low Fe) while concealing a hidden agenda (Ti). I don't think it would be possible to be a psychopath and have any Fi, even as a shadow function. They do not form attachments or have any empathy/core values.
I would agree with that as a stereotype. Although, Frank Underwood is certainly an ENTJ psychopath. He might be fictional but that type of character is realistic, especially among psychopath business leaders. Also, psychopath is more based on genetics mixed with type. A sociopath is created. I know an ISFP that got hooked on opiates and is a sociopath, now. He thinks he's a good person, but he's pulled off some shady shit. I lived with him and I always had to stay one step ahead of him, or else he'd take advantage of me, so I sold him some of my amphetamine prescription, occasionally. Sure, the money was ok, when times were tight, but I created a need to where he was always sucking up to me. He'd go out, on occasion, steal some food from a convenience store and offer me some. Even though the typing might sound bizarre, we discussed it and he is an ISFP. He'd take the medicine so he could spend all night drawing and being in his mood. Feeler sociopaths might be rare, but they are not impossible.
 

·
Birdie Borracho
Joined
·
9,380 Posts
I agree with your point .
Psychopathy (a recognized psychiatric problem, just like borderline, avoidant etc) is not the same as being a serial killer or someone who is a serial killer about to be unlocked into one. Moreso, serial killers are chance occurrences in a population, everything that has happened in their life along with the responses they choose to take have allowed them to develop into the person that they are.

Same with borderline (Jeffrey Dahmer) and that kid who went on a shooting spree aimed at girls - he had aspergers.

However, most of the terrifying serial killers such as Bundy have come from traumatic pasts, a criminal history, antisocial traits and narcissistic personality traits. It's because they can sift through the system with such tendencies of the psychiatric illness (i.e. Pathological lying) that have allowed them to conjure up such an alarming record of murders without much persons around them or society realising.
When you have a triad of illnesses and societal problems like that ,it can be difficult for others to detect it until it comes to a point where it is too late to do anything for yourself and others.

It has nothing to do with psychopathy causing serial killers or anything like that though, it's just when the possibility of a psychopath turning into a serial killer happens, it can lead to some of the most tragic results compared to other types of serial killers.

before we said something that supports this argument, ESTJs may despite being considered to not be calculable by societal norms, ESTJs could very well be some of the most calculable and intelligent people in the world. Same with psychopaths, I'm sure there are quite a lot of them in the spotlight, on the Nobel prize laureates list and running the biggest businesses and political governments at this very moment. Who's going to say "I'm a psychopath!" . Not much people with that illness will admit it, and those that don't generally tend to cause the most trouble. Just like any other illness.
I think knowing it gives me peace and allows me to live healthier. It's not like I'm emotionally troubled, but not having objective clarity can be difficult for a Ti user like myself. I've never been professionally diagnosed, although very few are that aren't criminals. Many people will actually call me a nice guy and I might even seem as a giving person. I can be nice, but just not empathize with your problems. I a more extreme way it's like John Wayne Gacy was a great guy in community who happened to brutally murder people. I don't have those predatorial desires, because I don't have any egotistical desires that must be fulfilled off harming others. Not saying I wouldn't, but I don't, and I'm ok (glad?) with that.

A mask is necessary because people cannot understand it. I'll get drunk and tell strangers I'm a psychopath just to see their reaction. It's usually a nervous laugh, followed by a "He's being serious" look on their face. If they ask me about it, it's usually that they're trying to figure out why I'm not murdering anybody. My mask is light. I don't try to delude people into thinking I'm some wonderfully caring person as that would be difficult to keep up. A narcissistic psycho/socio might do that because it's amusing and they might believe they are the anti-hero protagonist of life.

As referencing my signature, Dahmer and Bundy are just dumb fucks. A high-functioning psycho/socio is someone like a brain surgeon who operates on people and does not emotionally care if the person dies. They care about the quality of their work so they give it their best. Empathy clouds judgment and a strong psychopath can discern what is best over what's right. The trolley dilemma? Always kill the one. I think most people's empathy sucks, anyway. They have it, but it's selective. Most people can empathize for people they care about or people who they view as "good". But unless someone can empathize with a murderer on death row, then I do not care for their empathy. And strangely enough, those few people that do are the ones that I would actively avoid hurting. Maybe that's my own emotional weakness, but I respect the principles of a genuine person. If everybody was like that, then maybe I could lower my guard and not be so cold and heartless. It's a cruel world, though, and even the normal people can ruin things. It's been discussed on plenty of sociopath and psychopath forums the idea of an "empathy switch". The idea that empathy can be subtly felt, when conditions are right. It might not be actual empathy. Rather it's placing an extension of myself into other people and being like "Oh, I like me". I don't know. I forgot which one, but there was one serial killer who would have sex with the corpse. It was like a dead body was the only human that could relate to him. It's funny how I understand that, yet most people probably recoil in horror. I guess that was his version of empathy?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,975 Posts
I applaud trying to type serial killers but because of their disorder would it not make them hard to type since they can fake human interactions, their aberrations make it hard to determine if the personality is genuine and them being organized has more with them trying not to get caught, and not to be noticed for what they are
 

·
Birdie Borracho
Joined
·
9,380 Posts
I applaud trying to type serial killers but because of their disorder would it not make them hard to type since they can fake human interactions, their aberrations make it hard to determine if the personality is genuine and them being organized has more with them trying not to get caught, and not to be noticed for what they are
Cognitive functions are difficult to hide, because they're how our brain processes and receives information. A serial killer psychopath with ASPD, is going to be fully functioning, cognitively, but would be under-developed, emotionally. Bundy probably had the emotional depth of a 3-5 year old, which is none at all. His rational center would have fully developed, though. This means that even if he were a Fi dom, he could make an individual feeling judgment without emotion. It seems impossible but there's a reason they're called cognitive functions. He certainly was a Te dom, yet was plenty skilled to adapt himself to others.
@Tetsuo Shima I would think it might be the other way around. Except at that level of derangement, it'll more come down to how much a person fears getting caught. Ramirez never cared nor understood consequences, as he killed on manic impulse. Bundy fear consequences and was very proactive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
According to whom? I agree with the empathy and would say the emotions are more childish. A primitive instinct might fit some, but can I psychopath not be sad, happy, or angry. Certainly the last one applies, but even if they aren't as deep as a normal person, a psychopath can still be sad about something and be happy in situations. Sure, I might view a friend like you view your favorite shirt, but that is still some emotion, right? It might not be "good" enough, but I can't change it nor can I feel bad enough to change it. It is what it is.
This is pretty much the general consensus among psychopath researchers. I also have a psychology degree (not that "authority" means much to us ENTP's lol). Sociopathic & Pyschopathic Behavior » Criminal Profiling
Not the best source, but I'll look on the database later. Feeling affection for a favorite shirt would be considered a proto emotion because even when you get upset over losing your favorite shirt, it's not the same range as humans experience with living beings. More of a "meh, that sucks" sort of thing.



Psychopath really does cover a broad spectrum. I, too, don't have a strong reaction to those words. But the extent might be even deeper with the criminal psychopaths who are more desensitized than sub-clinical psychopaths. Remember, those tests are done on people who are psychotic just as much a psychopath. High-function psychopaths and sociopaths are rarely tested, because we generally do not seek therapy. The issue is with empathy not sanity. I'm not broken, just different.
Sub-clinical psychopaths don't qualify as true psychopaths, they're people who demonstrate a higher level of traits but not enough to be considered "psychopaths". Also, psychotic refers to psychosis, not psychopathy. Psychotic people have delusions, hallucinations, disorders like schizoaffective disorder, etc. That's completely different from antisocial personality disorder or psychopathy.
Factors of psychopathy and electrocortical response to emotional pictures: ...: EBSCOhost There's a lot of jargon there but it can kind of describe what's going on.

I would agree with that as a stereotype. Although, Frank Underwood is certainly an ENTJ psychopath. He might be fictional but that type of character is realistic, especially among psychopath business leaders. Also, psychopath is more based on genetics mixed with type. A sociopath is created. I know an ISFP that got hooked on opiates and is a sociopath, now. He thinks he's a good person, but he's pulled off some shady shit. I lived with him and I always had to stay one step ahead of him, or else he'd take advantage of me, so I sold him some of my amphetamine prescription, occasionally. Sure, the money was ok, when times were tight, but I created a need to where he was always sucking up to me. He'd go out, on occasion, steal some food from a convenience store and offer me some. Even though the typing might sound bizarre, we discussed it and he is an ISFP. He'd take the medicine so he could spend all night drawing and being in his mood. Feeler sociopaths might be rare, but they are not impossible.
That's more of a universal thing about drug addiction than sociopathy though. Once you're addicted, the addiction becomes the #1 priority. Not all addicts end up having to steal or resort to crime because some can find ways to manage their professional lives, but addiction always changes people. I agree your friend is probably ISFP, but anyone with an addiction is going to have serious problems because of it. Jesse Pinkman from Breaking Bad is a good example of an ISFP gone bad. Even though he's moral deep down, he still participates along the main character and pulls amoral acts all the time.
 
21 - 40 of 41 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top