I highly doubt that sexuality is an emotional experience for everyone. And I’m not talking about the asexuals. But I’ve read several times that some sociopaths consider sex more like a chore but don’t feel anything.
A normal human mind I guess means that your mind is a coherent structure centered in the neocortex, that is active whenever you’re conscious and not in deep sleep. The brain/mind regions are permanently “on” by default, as it should be. In the psychopath these get turned on and off, and a coherent, neocortex-centered strucutre isn’t established.
Acquiring happy (joy) I guess. According to some studies they get a lot of their psychopathic joy from dopamine, their dopamine reward system works 4 times stronger than that of normies I think. But I doubt that this is the case for all psychopaths.
In my experience with the psychopath girl, they umm.. come up with things they want to do, want to get, maybe how they come up with it is more instinct than thinking, and then when they do/get it, they experience a massive psychopathic joy dopamine reward.
I would have said partial, which is a certain kind of inferior. They don’t have all the facets that most other humans do. They used to say that you can’t do therapy with psychopaths. They just automatically game it and if they learn anything, they learn to mask better. But now they think that you can do therapy with psychopaths. But the therapy they do is actually fairly simple conditioning. Rewards and punishment. It’s at the behavioral level. They don’t try to build empathy. They teach not being an asshole as a skill. Selling it to the self-interest without hoping to have the psychopaths care about others.
We are sort of trained to see all others as some sort of shaken up version of ourselves, but seeing the dead eyes of a narcissist or psychopath, when the mask slips, let’s you know they are qualitatively different and impoverished.
Genetics seems to account for about 50% of who becomes a psychopath. Neglect is a strong factor and emotional abuse. It tends to be sustained. Not worse than the abuse others went through but a maintained abuse or neglect. Of course most people who go through sustained neglect and emotional abuse don’t become psychopaths.
But I think people should be careful to assume that really deep down, they have all that everyone has. Not in my experience. You can eliminate facets of yourself and/or have them eliminated by experience. There need not be some inner child in there suffering.
If the psychopath comes up with the umm “idea” or rather instinct that they want to get you to do X, and they succeed, they get the psychopathic joy reward. So yeah successful manipulation to get you to do X for example.
I think something is missing from this dopamine analysis. I think we would not call them psychopaths or think anything of the mentality if an important part of their dopamine didn’t come specifically from hurting others. Also from succesfully manipulating them.
No, I don’t mean tht they don’ have empathy so don’t notice if they hurt. I mean thta they gain emotional satisfaction from hurting, and doing that plus hiding it with manipulations is possibly their main drive in life, what everything else is structured around. If it was just eat sleep shit, nothing absnormal about that. Even doing these things at the cost of others without feeling bad about it is not particularly rare or psychopathic.
Lack of empathy means that they lack emotional empathy and the emotion-based conscience, but can still cognitively understand to some degree that they are hurting you and what you’re goung through. And since some of them (many of them, to various degrees) are also sadistic, those will actively manipulate you because they enjoy seeing you hurting.
All of our great thinkers are just making up synonyms and allegories to try and paint a picture of something that doesnt really have any specific words.
Categorization is just one of those attempts to structure and explain something. Granted. Not a very good pick, but you should not treat it like its some sort of defacto statement.
Whether its Jung or Freud, all of them are locked in a pitch back room where they are trying to orient themselves by touch. Just like the rest of us. They describe what they come across, which you can learn from, but you should never take as holy scripture or some kind of fact.
He is not wrong per say. The subconscious structures information and balances it out with the rest of your psyche. What it cannot structure, will break things. Its as simple as that.
Just because you threw a monkey wrench between a bunch of gears, doesnt really mean that the gears dont work, does it?
Well yes and no.
If your psyche is a library then a trauma is a spilled bookshelf.
You can by all means structure the spilled bookshelf. Explain how the spill happened. Why it resulted in the aftermath. Etc etc etc.
But technically speaking from the library’s perspective the spilled bookshelf, the trauma, is an anti structure.
Its a trauma in the first place because it does not fit. Its disorder. It cant be integrated and the psyche needs to work around it.
I am not entirely sure what the question or suggestion here was.
You popped out the idea that the system recognizes the information it has stored one way or another, like its a revelation.
Of course you know.
How would you not know?
Whether or not you know was never the question. It could not have been the question because if the system didnt know, if it was not stored within your psyche in any shape or form, then neither the event nor the trauma would exist in the first place.
However, just because it has been stored, it does not mean that you can simply “bring it back into the egoic narrative fold”.
Dropping that idea this simplisticly suggests that you have no work to do here, which is not the case.
Before you could bring it back into the egoic narrative fold, you have to transform it into something your egoic narrative fold can handle and internalize. THAT is what resolving a trauma means in laymans terms. You have to deconstruct it and “digest it” part by part so it no longer breaks the system because you learned how to categorize and internalize it.
YEs, work. My point is, Jungian analysis would preclude the work. Youa re treating trauma therapy as a given. But how do you even discover the trauma is there? How do you detect it?
With Jung, you probably would never. Anything that comes up can be explained by some emchanism or another, some category or another.
The way you even realize it’s there is by digging into the black box as a black box, feeling for where incoherence lies. Structure would more or less prevent this. What you need precicely is no safety bars, no borders. Because the spilled bookshelf does have a structure, it has a shape. It is the shape of the event and the emotions it generated, both of which are hidden.
You detect it by it’s effects on behavior. No other way around it.
Nobody, not the carrier of the trauma, not the inflictor of the trauma, not any other outside observer is aware of the trauma unless its deduced by it’s effects on behavior.
“You are acting out, there has to be a reason for it”.
Its a very good question all things considered because its not easy to recognize trauma, but thats exactly why Jung is kinda correct: The system will one way or another but internalize the given data.
It cant delete or undo it, so it either manages to deconstruct it, or builds around it, but yeah: Its gonna be a part of you.
Well, you are not entirely incorrect there, but you forgot about the part before the digging.
Thats what i eluded to above.
What would make you dig in the first place?
And thats behavior ques.
Otherwise, imagine a trauma which has no effect on you because it does not effect your behavior in any form and does not show it self.
Why would you dig in your black box then?
What on earth would you be looking for in the first place?
But that’s just not how the Jungian system works. You go to the doctor because your attention span hurts, or whatever it is, and you start analysing dreams and pionpointing archetypes.
YOu can easily do a lifetime of this and never uncover that you were abused as a child. Because the uncomfortable silence, the incoherent black holes, just never had space to emerge. The “why the fuck does this make no sense.”
Everything makes sense with Jung, everything has a place. You just need this, you just need that, play with dirt, the shadow self.
You need to feel the incoherence. In your bones. It has to have no shape, no category, no structure, and just feel incoherent. Then its own shape can emerge, by finding the frayed edges and where exactly along the egoic thread the crater is.