A Lack of Duality In The Mind of A Psychopath

Without much of an introcution to this topic, I will note that I think that psychopaths are essentially amoral. Or put another way, they are simply animals acting solely on their programming without any influence from that part of us that is moral. Why this occurs I am not entirely sure - I would suggest that things like environment, genetics, experience, etc. play a role. Analogous to this behavior is the addicted drug user who behaves in an amoral fashion to obtain his high - stealing from even his mother for drugs. These are similar in that psychopaths are required to act selfishly for similar biological needs. Their focus is simply on their programming and not their moral side.

Keep in mind that conscious thought and the ability to acknowledge that one’s behavior is immoral are two different things. The drug addict is conscious of his actions when he robs his mother to feed his habit but his behavior is not subject to his ability to be moral. The distinction is between consciousness and conscience. Psychopaths tend to be driven to a greater extent by instinctive behavior than are the rest of us. They are focused solely on their otherwise innate genetic programs which drive their behavior - the behaviors which the rest of us are able to attach a corresponding out-rage or guilt to: they have somehow eliminated their morality from their being (and their behaviors). In a person with an ability to make moral distinctions there is a constant balancing of instincts (wants and desires) and conscience (not to be confused with our consciousness). I think it’s a conflict and a duality with either side taking control of any given situation and any given behavior. There are some whose morality trumps their instincts constantly and some whose instinct are dominant. Guilt often playing a role in how we behave. Some waiver back and forth between animal and moral behavior with no clear direction. With psychopathic behavior the moral side is not functioning as an influence - permitting the psychopath to act simply as an animal - with no guilt or remorse.

Some might argue that it’s the instincts of the psychopath that are different. That they lack the “programming” for things like empathy and compassion. I don’t think so because it seems to me that animals don’t have a moral code. They act according to their programming and things like self-sacrifice and sharing are not their common attributes - I'm not sure morality exists at all out side we humans. I think there is some part of our being that drives our behavior to be moral and I don’t think it’s programming (instincts, etc.). And if you have read my blog I believe it’s the same thing that many people have labeled “god” or “Allah” or “spirit” or “soul” or a host of other similar names. That is not to say that I believe our morality is some form of a floating white god with white hair and a robe. Just that the distinction between good and evil is often made in this very simplistic thoughtless way.

To summarize, I think we do have conscious thought, and a conscience. Do we have a choice between acting like an animal and behaving morally? I would say not in all instances. Choice is (for me) not a good description of what may be at play. Does the drug addict have a choice in stealing to satisfy his biological need to get high? Does the starving man have a choice in not stealing the food? Does the psychopath have a choice in not treating people like objects? We could debate that point but I think that at some point the choice to be moral is lost to dominating programs and instinctual behaviors (“forgive them, father for they know not what they do”). I also believe that both moral growth and animal behavior can be reinforced in an individual. That is to say biological reinforcement can lead to habitual behavior. Similarly, moral behavior can lead to even more moral behavior. When we say people can grow in moral character we mean they can become more moral. When we say people can become and act like animals what we really mean is that their behavior is central to their programming.

I am not convinced of arguments which profess that morality is a form of reasoned behavior or is itself hard-wired or instinctive. It seems clear that even if morality developed from the evolution of a higher level of intelligence (which I believe it did), this would not necessarily negate the possibility that such a development is not now contrary to the very things which permitted that evolution - to our instinctual behaviors and programming.