Sin vs. Psychopathy: Where to draw the line?

[TotusTuusForever]

I’ve been assessing the differences between mental conditions (such as “malignant narcissism”, “Psychopathy“, and “Sociopathy”) and sin in hopes to acquire a better understanding of where psychoanalysis end and culpability begins. I have searched the web but cannot find a good resource to explain theses mental conditions which primarily victimize others while the perpetrators experience low levels or no levels of distress. Though, I have come across the concept of the Jezebel Spirit which comes from Scripture(1Kings). However, I’m not sure whether it’s fair to blame these conditions solely on sin even though they fit the description of the Jezebel spirit. Are there differences between people with narcissistic traits (for example) and unrepentant people who have given themselves over evildoing? Or, are these conditions a worldly label for sin? Or is there simply no way to discern the differences?

 

[Vico]

… culpability begins …

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1734 Freedom makes man responsible for his acts to the extent that they are voluntary. …
1735 Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished …
1859 Mortal sin … implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice …

 

[TotusTuusForever]

Thank you so much for your thorough reply. It helped me realize I am curious about the voluntary component of evil choices. When a person does evil followed by a smirk (for example) can something like that really be blamed on their brain instead of their will?

 

[Sarcelle]

It’s complex.

Psychopaths do have a different brains when compared to normal people.

It has been observed via MRI. Their brain wiring is also different.

They seem to get pleasure from hurting others.

Seems like they are born evil. They start with hurting animals and then progress to hurting people. They do not have a conscience and no empathy.

 

[Vico]

Thank you so much for your thorough reply. It helped me realize I am curious about the voluntary component of evil choices. When a person does evil followed by a smirk (for example) can something like that really be blamed on their brain instead of their will?

I think that is one reason that the Catechism states this:

1861 … However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

 

[TotusTuusForever]

It has been observed via MRI. Their brain wiring is also different.

This is very interesting. But, it’s also weird to think that someone would be born evil. The only person in Christianity who is known to be born evil seems to be the antichrist. However, clearly science has discovered something here. It would be interesting to know how much culpability they have in their evildoing. It seems so bizarre me that someone who enjoys doing evil to others their whole life would be innocent and go to heaven because it seems near impossible for these types to be remorseful. I would be very curious to know an exorcists take on this.

 

[SPBlitz]

It seems so bizarre me that someone who enjoys doing evil to others their whole life would be innocent and go to heaven because it seems near impossible for these types to be remorseful. I

Presumably that aspect of their brain would be ‘fixed’ after death, so in heaven they’d be normal again. What would really be interesting though is how much their intellect/soul reflects the evil nature. Once their intellect is removed from their malfunctioning brain, are they still unrepentant?

 

[OddBird]

It has been observed via MRI. Their brain wiring is also different.

There is a larger scale study going on in Geneva right now about the potential causes of psychopathy in the way the neural network is wired. It’s making waves in legal circles because of its potential implications - can a criminal who is evil because he was born wired a particular way be held responsible for his actions ?

 

[SPBlitz]

can a criminal who is evil because he was born wired a particular way be held responsible for his actions ?

You could always argue that their imprisonment is for the common good since, responsible or not they are a danger to others.

 

[OddBird]

Yes, but what is at play is not whether or not they should be imprisoned (if they are dangerous, they will be anyway) but whether victims and/or their families will ever be able to have a judiciary process take place to shed light on and acknowledge the truth of what happened. In case of penal irresponsibility, it wouldn’t happen (at least here in Switzerland).

 

[Calliope]

My sister worked in an institutiuon for the criminally insane. She’s a psychiatrist. Some people are born, injured or damaged psychologically to the point where they are no longer really capable of making the moral choices that most people are. Scary stuff.

There are likely many many “borderline” cases where the person isn’t criminal, but still engages in behavior that they are not fully capable to control, and I doubt there is any way for us to fully be able to suss this out. We, as individuals and as a society do the best we can to either help the person gain the therapy that might help them, and to control their behavior so they are not a danger to society or themselves.

I’m a recovering addict. For a time I was out of control of even myself. I also have serious mental illness and need to be medicated. Some forms of mental illness are not currently treatable my medication or therapy. What to do?

I read a book about the human brain and how we make choices. It included a story of a man who seemingly out of nowhere became interested in child porn. It was discovered he had a brain tumor. After the tumor was removed, he had zero interest in the porn. A number of years later he again became attracted to child porn, it was discovered the tumor had grown once again.

That was a clear case of a cause outside of his control leading to criminal/immoral behavior. I suspect there are lots of cases that are similar though less clear.

 

[SPBlitz]

That was a clear case of a cause outside of his control leading to criminal/immoral behavior. I suspect there are lots of cases that are similar though less clear.

To me, the difference is that having an interest or impulse to do something immoral is not the same as being force to do it. At what point can we delineate between a temptation and actually losing free will?

 

[po18guy]

This can only be done on an individual basis. As it is with all “spectrum” conditions, each is a unique personality and psychology. Studies? Certainly the APA has some, but if they are more than a few years old, the results, and even the conclusions are out of date and may stem from flawed methodology.

For those seeking absolution and reconciliation with God, the process is clearly more complicated, as they must grasp, at least intellectually, the gravity of their sin.

 

[Lou2U]

It’s complex.

Psychopaths do have a different brains when compared to normal people.

It has been observed via MRI. Their brain wiring is also different.

They seem to get pleasure from hurting others.

Seems like they are born evil. They start with hurting animals and then progress to hurting people. They do not have a conscience and no empathy.

It’s interesting. I learnt about a case a few years ago where a doctor was studying brain scans of psychopaths vs ordinary people. He was doing another study at the time, using brain scans of his and his family’s brains. For fun, he looked at them for psychpathy although he didn’t know whose scan was whose. There was one brain that had all the characteristics of a “psychopath brain”. He looked up whose scan it was, and it was his own.

The most interesting thing about it is that when he told his family, not one person was surprised. They’d all spotted certain traits in his behaviour and the way he worked which were in some way ‘similar’ to a psychopath, even though he’d never actually hurt someone or become that psychopath. He put it down to his childhood, and growing up in a loving environment. Even he acknowledged there was something ‘different’ about him and the way he thought, but he’d never assumed his brain was why. I’ll link to it if I can find it.

Edit - here: The Neuroscientist Who Discovered He Was a Psychopath | Science | Smithsonian Magazine

It definitely is interesting for legal cases as well. Culpability as a factor in these cases is something I think we will see much more often. Whether it is acceptable remains to be seen.

 

[Calliope]

At what point can we delineate between a temptation and actually losing free will?

I don’t think we can. I believe that is in keeping with the Church’s teaching that only God can judge the soul, because even when we try to be fair, we can’t really know in the majority of cases. We do the best we can with the knowledge we have, understanding that we will not always make the right call.

 

[Theban]

Well, I guess I can weigh in here on my experience.

I’ve never went and gotten myself diagnosed, but I strongly suspect that I have a case of psychopathy (being defined as a condition in which the part of the brain that controls empathy is underdeveloped to a large or small degree). The way I’ve heard empathy described by others is completely foreign to me, and in my childhood I exhibited all of the typical behaviors that are linked with psychopaths. I’ve never had any problems with hurting others to get what I want, and I frequently did so for no reason at all too, before my conversion. I would say that I’m still very much guilty of doing all the things I did, in spite of it simply being my natural inclination. Perhaps the culpability would be diminished somewhat, so a psychopath killing someone would be an animalistic sin rather than a diabolical one, but I personally doubt it.

The conscience is separate from the empathetic feeling, and no matter what there is always that intrinsic knowledge of right and wrong in the back of your head. However, while empathy (I assume) works to enforce and strengthen the conscience, a psychopath has no qualms at all with ignoring it. It is as though your sense of balance had become disordered, and you no longer have a preference for standing straight up. You would still know that your standing upside down, but you just prefer it that way.

 

[Theban]

As for beng “born evil”, I actually asked my priest this once when I felt as though trying to fix my behavior was hopeless. He said that nobody is born evil, and that no matter what God will always offer us a way out of sin. No one is tempted beyond their ability. And it was true, I may not be able to feel empathy like others, but I can still acknowledge their rights and value. I may have a few extra difficulties with pride and lying and what not, but if so then God will just help more.

 

[blackforest]

This is very interesting. But, it’s also weird to think that someone would be born evil.

I watched a PBS documentary about this. The hypothesis is that they’re not born but made through trauma. Tough-on-crime people hate hearing this, but early childhood abuse, for example, can change the physiological make-up of the brain. I can’t say for certainty that this applies to all psycho/sociopathic criminals, but it’s an interesting tidbit to consider.

 

[Patri]

He will help you more. I think there are things that come easy to some and they don’t have to make an effort but not to others. The important thing is to recognise the areas we need to work harder on and try to better and never give up trying.

 

[pnewton]

As stated twice already, we cannot not draw the line. It is impossible. God alone draws this line. It is not our task, but might be our sin, if we try to do this on an individual.