Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by Jarod, Jan 18, 2013.
This link has a certificate issue, if anybody finds a better one, can you put it up? thanks.
Many of these tests cannot be objectively verified. They are attempts at approximation. Quite a few psychiatric tests may not be valid, at least to objective standards, we need better research to establish which have validity.
I too have followed Prof Hare's excellent work for about the last 15 years.
I am also fully on his side about this!
Crimminality is a social construct - as are laws. It/they change with the current zeitgeist, they are not "natural" or consistent across all cultures.
Prof Hare has more recently been trying to tease out what he calls "white collar" psychopathy - the psycopaths who are politicians, who are CEOs, who are bankers, who are ATOS, who are insurance brokers etc.
The ones who do the real damage to the world and humanity as opposed to the few who are serial killers or rapists.
He has found this difficult - these people do not tend to co-operate with his checklist or probings, and don't want to be seen in a bad light!
He has had some progress, by asking others to "answer" the questions for the folk of interest, thus gaining a little insight from folk who are exposed to the psychopath.
So this new paper wants to make it compulsory for an invalid construct to be added, so that the really influential psychopaths don't get tarred with the name and can carry on as they were....
I do not think so!
From the unpublished Skeeme and Cooke article.
Crimminality is still just an arbitrary construct.
What is "criminal" in one culture may be lauded be in another.
It is not a contender for a listing on a psychopathy checklist - any more than using loopholes to avoid corporate tax is!
You can also try a Google Site Search
Separate names with a comma.