Food for thought

[Brian C.]

*http://www.healthzone.ca/health/articlePrint/530429

Relevant today?


Brian.

[Biologist]

Brian,

Recent books on Sociopathy cite four percent (4%) of the general population as being the estimated number of sociopaths in society. It would make sense, based on the science that we know, and for reasons that the literature suggests, that doctors would be well represented in this group (i.e., "over-well" represented). What I mean is that numbers would be expected to be higher in this particular demographic than for other demographics.

The math is not good for another reason too: Of the four percent, only one quarter are females (i.e., 1% of the population) which leaves a disproportionate number of men in this group. Most doctors are men -- so the concentration in the population of doctors is higher for this reason alone.

The combined effect suggests a significant number of sociopaths among doctors. Well beyond 4%.

Thanks for finding this article. It is of interest to me.

Biologist

[Brian C.]

Psychopathy/Sociopathy is THE major problem for humanity, dwarfing all others.
People wonder why Peace & Justice never prevail.
They NEVER, EVER will while these defective creatures are allowed to attain positions of power and influence.

Brain scanning can now identify them categorically.

Brian.

[Biologist]

Brian,

You are probably well aware of these series of experiments. I believe much "doctor psychology" is evident here -- more significant than the limited incidence of organic mental defect (e.g., sociopathy):

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

Here are some pertinent quotes:

"Moreover, Milgram later investigated the effect of the experiment's locale on obedience levels, (e.g. one experiment was held in a respectable university, the other in an unregistered, backstreet office in a bustling city; the greater the locale's respectability, the greater the obedience rate)."

"Experiment 10 took place in a modest office in Bridgeport, Connecticut, purporting to be the commercial entity "Research Associates of Bridgeport" without apparent connection to Yale University, to eliminate the university's prestige as a factor influencing the participants' behavior. In those conditions, obedience dropped to 47.5 percent."

[MY NOTE: Pharma is viewed by many people -- including doctors -- as being respectable, at parity with universities (many of which are no longer very respectable themselves any more partly due to pharma's influence per some of the books I've read recently)]

"The second is the agentic state theory, wherein, per Milgram, the essence of obedience consists in the fact that a person comes to view himself as the instrument for carrying out another person's wishes, and he therefore no longer sees himself as responsible for his actions. Once this critical shift of viewpoint has occurred in the person, all of the essential features of obedience follow."

"In Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View, Milgram describes 19 variations of his experiment. Generally, when the victim's physical immediacy was increased, the participant's compliance decreased. The participant's compliance also decreased when the authority's physical immediacy decreased (Experiments 1–4)."

[MY NOTE: Pharma is omnipresent for doctors from the time they enter med school.]

"Charles Sheridan and Richard King hypothesized that some of Milgram's subjects may have suspected that the victim was faking, so they repeated the experiment with a real victim: a puppy. They found that 20 out of the 26 participants complied to the end. The six who did not were all male; all 13 of the women obeyed to the end, although many were highly disturbed and some openly wept."

"Milgram also combined the power of authority with that of conformity. In those experiments, the participant was joined by one or two additional "teachers" (also actors, like the "learner"). The behavior of the participants' peers strongly affe cted the results. In Experiment 17, when two additional teachers refused to comply, only 4 of 40 participants continued in the experiment. In Experiment 18, the participant performed a subsidiary task (reading the questions via a microphone or recording the learner's answers) with another "teacher" who complied fully. In that variation, only 3 of 40 defied the experimenter."

[Monkey see; monkey do -- Pharma uses "Opinion Leaders" selected among the ranks of doctors to serve as "lead monkey"; they are well rewarded in cash for their services such as speaking to other doctors at pharma sponcered "events" (e.g., continuing education seminars.)]


"This is, perhaps, the most fundamental lesson of our study: Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority." --Stanley Milgram
_______________

Interesting words from one of the subjects:

*http://www.jewishcurrents.org/2004-jan-dimow.htm


Biologist

[Brian C.]

All societies evolve into hierarchies and given Milgram's findings (he was only 51 when he died, what a loss) the grim consequences of allowing psychopaths to enter the hierarchy are all too apparent. The further up the chain the more devastating the consequences, as history shows!

Thank you for linking to Joseph Dimow's testimony Biologist, I hadn't seen that before.

Brian.

[cjbrooksjc]

This is only a 'common sense' opinion, but I feel a large influence toward sociopatic behavior may be found in academia. Doctors are told not to 'get attached' or be invested in the outcome of their patients conditions. They learn to treat complaint symptoms as any scientist would treat a curious anomaly in the lab, or as any mechanic would treat an unusual noise under the hood. What I'm trying to say is that people do not come to this profession with an innate tendency toward sociopathic behavior but rather 'learn' this set of tactics as a shield from undue, emotional influence, and the resultant behavior makes some SEEM sociopathic when they are only behaving professionally according to their training. They become, in a sense, binary decision makers, simply and efficiently executing their program. FWIW

Brooks

[Brian C.]

Psychopaths, having innately no empathy, view other human beings simply as objects to be manipulated and controlled to their own entirely selfish, narcissistic ends. This has two corollaries.

1. The psychopathic entity seeks jobs and positions where he/she (more hes than shes demographically) can exercise virtually unfettered control over others. E.g. armed forces, police, prison service etc.

2. The psychopathic entity learns to be an expert manipulator early in life and quickly subverts normal human beings that he/she comes into regular contact with into the desired modes of behaviour. "Norms" can become sociopathic under this influence.

The popular, promulgated image of a psychopath is that of the thug or paedophile. In fact most do not fit that image. According to intelligence they can rise into all strata of society and can be found in all professions.
Just one in any organization can have enormous influence because they are innately ruthless and therefore are more efficient in rising to the top.
They have no compunction using others to advance then discarding them when no longer seen as useful.

There is no intrinsic bar to the advancement of psychopathic types in medicine, just as there appears to be none in any other career in our society.

It only takes one to corrupt many - and they recognize their own and form strategic alliances within and across professional boundaries.

Welcome back Brooks :wink:

Brian.

[cjbrooksjc]

Brian: I agree with all your assessments. prima facie. I just want to to say we should not paint all seeming sociopaths with the same brush. Some of these people are broken from birth, some are simply (IMHO) responding according to their training.

Thanks for the flowers.

Brooks

[Brian C.]

"I agree with all your assessments. prima facie. I just want to to say we should not paint all seeming sociopaths with the same brush. Some of these people are broken from birth, some are simply (IMHO) responding according to their training."

Of course. Whatever the origin we must recognize the pathology and simply walk away.

"Thanks for the flowers."

Wear them with white :lol:

Brian.

[Biologist]

Insightful comments, Brooks. I wish I had time to comment.

Ditto on your comments, Brian.

Biologist