Firstly to define what psychopathy is for the purposes of this article: some experts, specialists and the like talk about Machiavellianism and narcissism as character traits of psychopathy, now although this is often true (not always, not all psychopaths are charismatic for example) generally it seems when psychology experts and CIA profilers talk about psychopaths, what they’re in actual fact talking about is “a dark triad individual”, using the term “psychopath” as synonymous with “dark triad.” When I refer to psychopathy here, I will be looking at psychopathy in and of itself, not the related character traits that psychopaths often possess such as narcissism and Machiavellianism as those traits of the dark triad have their own articles here (narcissism will soon) and are independent character traits in and of themselves.
In this article you’re going to learn what psychopathy is as well as how to emulate its beneficial abilities, this is relevant so you can differentiate (although not without difficulty) between someone who is very good at being an asshole and consciously detaching themselves from problems (for reasons of rationalism by practicing stoicism) and someone who is clinically incapable of empathising with another human-being (which is what psychopathy is) there is one major difference between stoicism and psychopathy, the choice to care. In practice, a psychopath’s empathy switch is constantly set to “off” and cannot be turned on via conscious or subconscious choice, it’s a neurological defect. A stoic’s empathy switch is set to “off” consciously but can be turned “on” or its the reverse, the empathy switch is “on” by default and quickly switched to “off” (dependent on the stoic in question and their level of practice/desensitisation to their own emotional sensations.)
Psychopathy is essentially the inability to empathise with others; it is both a gift and a curse in and of itself. It is a gift for the psychopath because it presents them with many avenues in which to act without any internal moral conscience, it’s this lack of conscience which makes psychopaths feel somewhat omnipotent, feeding their narcissism, because they don’t feel anxiety when pondering morality should they choose to ponder it. Any pondering they do of morality is merely intellectual in nature, it’s not emotional in basis. They have no morality. Psychopaths are amoral by merit of their inability to empathise. Their emotions are for them, and them alone, they are solipsistically emotional, other people’s emotion exists for nothing but manipulation to them. Psychopaths are amoral or immoral (depending on how you look at it), to have morals you actually have to care about people and by nature of a psychopaths neurology, they’re incapable of doing this, or so barely capable of it that it is statistically insignificant in any decision making processes they go through. Such a neurological defect can be shown by a low amount of brain activity on an MRI scanner.
Many people who read red pill philosophy are aware of the power which is inherent to “not giving a fuck”, a psychopath never gives a fuck, at least, not about you as a person, your well-being, your problems, your essence. What they give a fuck about is getting what they want by any means necessary. They never care about YOU in and of yourself, but merely care about you as a by-product of your utility to them, this is why in some circumstances they may conditionally care about you (for as long as your useful.)
Your utility is generally connected to you providing them with an immediate service or a service soon to be called on in the future (to use you), thus they want to safeguard you as their “investment” until they can come collect on your services, not because they actually care about your well-being in and of itself – this is something a psychopath is completely incapable of, however a charming psychopath can convince “their target” that they care about you. No matter how much you desire it and how much they feed into that desire, their facade of caring for you is merely a manifestation of Machiavellianism, they are totally and utterly incapable of such behaviour; anything you believe in this context is zealous in nature – substantiated by idealistic desire and misdirection, not tangibility, reason or fact.
Some psychopaths are so cold it is completely obvious they are psychopathic, others are very good at manifesting a warm charismatic persona, as such that you would never guess they are psychopathic from simply interacting with them, these types blend in. It depends on the psychopath in question, although all psychopaths share the trait of being uncaring and incapable of empathy internally, they are still fundamentally different characters and this affects their choice of presentation which they give to the world around them, some are very obviously detached and cold, others can be incredibly charming and warm (in order to befriend and betray etc.) What one must realise is that the emotion a psychopath feeds you (because that is what they are doing to you, feeding your hindbrain) is inherently superficial – it is a device to manipulate you via your emotions, to gain leverage over you, to influence.
Psychopaths have incredible powers of observation and deduction. Your body language, your eye movement, the placement of your hands, your posture, your vocal tonality – they are the masters of discerning the strength of one’s frame. Worse to be a person with a weak frame that realises a psychopath is analysing their every fidget, glance and bodily scratch than be an ignorant participant in a psychopaths internal observational experiment where mental notes are made on your presentation and correlated to personality traits, such as the likelihood of your susceptibility to certain types of behaviour and courses of action as well as a quick cost-benefit analysis which deduces your risk factor as an adversary to them. Psychopaths are social predators, they will use this information to control you and reduce your working effectiveness as well as in some situations, ensnare you totally if you’re not careful. Their motives depend vastly on your utility, perhaps how sexually appealing you are as well as how much you’ve tried to shit on their ego (aka: pissed them off.)
All psychopaths are Machiavellians, but not all Machiavellians are psychopaths. You can learn the skills psychopaths use, you can utilise stoicism to emulate psychopathic traits, so in a way, one could argue, you could in fact emulate a psychopath so well through training that it’s difficult to discern the difference between you in your stage of completed training and a legitimate naturally born psychopath, however, you cannot neurologically become a psychopath, you will always have to try to “maintain frame”, you will always have to keep on top of yourself and stay in control. Things which are innate to a psychopath by mere nature of their biology you will have to contest, suppress and/or reconcile such as the psychopaths inability to empathise with their victims pain and thus no inclination to deliberate over the morality of such actions, no feelings of guilt, no remorse, nothing – there’s no process for them to deal with that as the emotional process simply never occurs for them. For a non-psychopath, it does.
Machiavellianism can be taught but psychopathy cannot. One is a vocation/art, the other is a neurological disorder. Although you cannot become psychopathic, you can learn skills which come naturally to the psychopath.
To a psychopath you are always perceived through the filter of “being a tool” if you have no utility to a psychopath, a psychopath will not bother you. If you are a liability to a psychopath and you have no utility, they will not hesitate to fuck your life up. Psychopaths are the personification of the concept of “cruelness” because they are completely liberated from guilt and are thus mercilessly ruthless, as I’ve already said, they are biologically incapable of empathising with other human-beings and thus guilt is not a phenomenon they ever have to contend with. The ability to connect with other humans and feel guilt is what stops a lot of you from embellishing in your own amoral selfishness, the barrier between yourself and cognitive decision-making liberation.
Due to their genetic propensity for hyper-emotionalism female psychopathy is rare, in it’s place your standard run of the mill women commit immoral acts by disassociating from reality to justify their actions so although their behaviours can achieve a similar result they still experience an emotional component and thus by merit of that, are non-psychopathic. This emotion manifests through “feeling” and they have to deal with it, women tend not to have “an absence of emotion” like a stoic does through suppression but rather they are good at “coping with emotion” as in, addressing it when it comes along and putting it to rest to restore their emotional balance. They do this by rationalising it away with falsehoods and deluding themselves into believing an idealistic and biased perception of events which allows them to reconcile their sense of guilt with their committed atrocity. EG: blame shifting, justifying, tweaking facts.
Women are very good at making themselves believe bullshit due to the foundations of their reasoning stemming from their current emotional state, thus they can self-deceive and disassociate in a way that most men find remarkably difficult to comprehend being as inherently rational as they are.
It’s ironic that, within a context of “red pill, blue pill” that the psychopath has probably some of the most astute, observational insight you’ll ever hear uttered from the breath of a human life. Their ability to observe deeply and comprehend the synoptic workings of the various elements which make up a targets persona allows them to weaponise the truth, by having such a strong understanding of the inner workings of a person’s specific circumstances they can maleate the relevant knowledge to overwhelm a target with a tirade of truth, truth delivered in such a callous and cold way that it borders on abuse. This is truth that the target usually isn’t mentally strong enough to hear or handle; kind of like “swallowing the pill” except this person has ill-intent and is injecting you with a much higher dosage.
Psychopaths can bury the truth in a glazing of bullshit and use the credibility of the truthful elements within their presentation to convince the target of the false elements via repetitions and false appeals to credibility which belong to different components of their presentation, the “grains of truth”, not the elements which are fictitious or illusory in question. However a psychopath will attempt to transfer the credibility from the truthful statement onto the untruthful statement in this strangely amalgamated package bundle of psychological bullshit, it’s for this reason they make exceptional gaslighters. They possess the ability to drive people insane because they won’t feel guilt for emotionally abusing you. This paragraph of text borders heavily on Machiavellianism, but a Machiavellian with minimal psychopathic traits cannot gaslight in a way that a psychopath with Machiavellian traits can.
If Machiavellianism is neutral, a tool which can be maleated into a tool for attack or defence or even mere abstinence, psychopathy has a distinctively aggressive edge to it, as by its very nature, it will cause harm – it cannot be suppressed or argued – it simply “is.” It is a condition.
What does this mean for someone who isn’t psychopathic but wants to implement this facet of the triad into their life? How can you “utilise” psychopathy when it’s a neurological condition? Well what you can do is utilise the psychological abilities that the condition rewards its occupant without being restrained by the curse of being incapable of emotionally connecting to other beings. As I’m keeping narcissism and Machiavellianism separated to their respective corners of the triad, I’m just going to look at the powers of perception and observation psychopathy awards as well as the self-control and frame control it grants rather than explore the other facets of the triad.
“Not giving a fuck” – Empathy, guilt, fear, anxiety etc – the crippling, limit imposing emotions.
To embody this trait in a non-psychopathic person one must substitute an inability to empathise with the non-psychopathic equivalent, which is not an inability to give a fuck, but proficiently suppressing how many fucks you give – stoicism.
Stoicism, verb form “to be stoic” is the mental process of suppressing emotions, not thinking about them, not reasoning with them, not reconciling them but simply concentrating so strongly on the emotions at hand with “nothingness” that you destroy the integrity of the emotional presence within your mind using your will. Concentration, intense focus, like a ray of sunlight refined into a narrow beam through a magnifying lens is the embodiment of mental power, discipline. Emotion, unacknowledged, without any facts or bullshit added to it will pass, it is simply a biological impulse, a feeling, one part of your brain sending a communication to another part and causing discomfort. By addressing feelings you give them more importance and power than they inherently possess, their power lays in their potential to influence you, if you destroy their potential they become powerless, nothing but mere tickles, tingles and sensations. Think of the destruction of negative emotions as killing Hitler when he was a baby, potential to fuck shit up getting destroyed.
If you are for example, as is common with many nowadays, anxious, concentrate on the anxiety, embrace it rather than pretend it isn’t there, concentrate very hard and try to clear your mind focusing on the sensation of irrational fear (which is what debilitating anxiety is), in a way one could say this is a form of meditation, it is disconnecting ones thoughts from one’s feelings so that the irrational and harmful nature of negative emotions cannot pollute the thoughts and thus subsequent actions of an individual’s fibre.
One could well argue that stoicism can be utilised as a purification process of sorts, it allows one to keep self-control, frame and become the master of their own destiny. If you can overcome negative emotions, the debilitating emotions, your power as an individual spikes massively. Fearlessness is power. Confidence is power. These are things which come naturally in the absence of negative cognitive feedback loops and unhealthy detrimental emotion rampaging around in one’s mind. I recommend practicing meditation, look up Buddhist temples in your area and see if you can go along and meditate with them.
I have this book on my Amazon wish-list until I do my next shop as I was recommended it to be a good book on Zen/frame control: Zen in the Art of Archery (the link is a referral link, meaning Amazon gives me money if you buy the book through that link – so if you’re interested and want to support this site, do so.)
“The powers of observation – The ability to understand, discern, correlate or simply “connect the dots” based on non-verbal cues”
The powers of observation are not psychopathic per se, but anyone who has formal training in psychology based roles such as psychiatry tend to have heightened powers of observation, a critical mind that can observe and deduce to create effective analysis. Why do you think that is? It’s because the people they’re dealing with do, psychopaths, dark triads of all complexions and tendencies are very intelligent minds. Manipulation does not know stupidity and psychopaths are always manipulative. This is why the job of a shrink requires them to be able to comprehend these individuals in some tangible manner so that they may give some kind of evaluative report, even if it isn’t completely correct they have to medicalise how fucked up the dark triad individual in question is and somehow rationalise an explanation for their their disturbing mind waging warfare.
OK, to the gritty now, cold reading is essentially what you’re after. Cold reading is the ability to create deductions based upon non-verbal observations and the nuances in verbal communication, so nonverbally we’re talking posture, body language: what direction do they face, their hand placement, their eye movement speed, are they fidgeting or controlled, do they scratch or needlessly touch areas of themselves for no obvious reason (eg: putting your hand on your neck, bringing hands together to make hand gestures etc.), non-verbal but auditory cues include sighing, breathing heavily and making noise with the air in the nose, such as snorting. What direction do they gaze in, can they hold eye contact – yes or no? Who looks away first? The last one is a hugely important one, it signifies confidence and dominance.
Verbally we’re talking tonality, with word choice do they self-censor? Do they use Ebonics? Do they swear? What idiolectal mannerisms do they adopt? In the UK accent often gives away one’s social class and economic standing, with the better educated trying to hide their natural regional accents (you see this a lot in places like Scotland/Newcastle) by consciously changing their pronunciation of vowel sounds to sound more southern, whereas the lower class give no fucks and pronounce many things incorrectly, staying true to the local dialect/accent.
There’s overall articulacy (to indicate speed of thought, knowledge base, intelligence, charisma etc.) and then there’s vocabulary, do they use simple words or complex ones? When they use complex language is that natural or a redundant effort to impress present company involved?
Clothing, make-up and overall presentation. What do they wear? Why do they wear it? What image are they trying to convey to the world around them? Is it a rocker full of tattoos and piercings? They want to communicate they’re rebellious and don’t give a fuck, they don’t respect boundaries and demand respect. Man in a suit? Wants to communicate he’s socially and economically successful, probably thinks he’s better than you are unless it’s a cheap suit and he’s going for a job interview at McDonalds. Black guy in a jersey wearing abundant, opulent and excessive jewellery? He’s peacocking to get women and wants to command respect by implying he’s a force to be reckoned with both physically and economically.
Make-up is a bigger one in and of itself; it demonstrates vanity and a preoccupation with the perception of one’s physical presentation. Makeup is worn by most women; their looks are both their strength and their weakness as it’s their major and preferred tool for self-betterment. Women who wear little to zero make-up and don’t look like candle wax just melted are the natural genetic beauties. Women who wear abundant amounts are insecure and trying to deceive you with illusion by attempting to convince you they are more sexually desirable than the genetics Mother Nature gave them. Internally in their heart of hearts, every time they see a naturally pretty girl and get jealous, they know they’re not, and they live this lie every day thus causing them to be insecure as fuck.
Through cold reading you will fine-tune your intuition to a point where you know things about a person without really being able to reason quickly why you think these things whilst maintaining a high degree of accuracy about your perception. Once competent, your “intuition” or “gut” will be right the majority of the time about your deductions. The great thing about cold reading is it’s called cold because its covert, you can ascertain all this information, a plethora of it, via mere observation – without having any meaningful or probing conversation with the person in question (which would be overt or hot) – it’s a great way to “scout for information” before having to deal with a person. You can then use this knowledge to make rational assumptions about a person and use this as you see fit in your future interactions with them to help you make decisions and protect yourself, or if you should choose to, influence them or gain their trust.
I recommend you sit around in public places, say coffee shops and just observe people. Listen to people earnestly. Look at them closely. Eavesdrop like fuck, don’t stare just glance around, use your peripheral vision to analyse too. If you have sunglasses, great – you will conceal your line of sight. Observing how different types of people behave will only attune your ability to read people and discern things about them. The more you do it, the better you’ll get. Like anything, you have to put the time in. Try to interact passively with a huge range of character types.
I would love to recommend a book on observation for you to read, as truly it would give me a good excuse to whack up another referral link and potentially make me some more monies, however, my experience and knowledge of observation is completely vocational so until a respectable individual points me in the direction of a book on cold reading/observation which I’m willing to endorse with my reputation I shan’t be posting any referral links on Amazon to such books on this topic.
If you have any suggestions, feel free to get in touch and give some solid reasoning as to why said book is worth my attention and I shall/buy read the work in question before contemplating endorsing it in the future to the readers here.
I hope earnestly that you enjoyed the read and perhaps learned a thing or two from one’s insights, until next time…