Psychopaths Still Care About Family

Contrary to most books and 'authorities' on the subject, I firmly believe that Psychopaths can care deeply for the people who are close to them, even though they don't give a damn about anyone else.

Most non-psychopath 'experts' discuss psychopaths using their family and close friends only to fill their narcissistic needs, for money, etc. But in my last post, I discussed a little bit of perplexment (yes, I just made that up) with the fact that I'm still intensely connected with my child, and honestly care for my family and closest friends.

Today, I came across a quote in Ragnar Redbeard's "Might is Right" that sums up how I feel on the matter perfectly:

"A mans FIRST duty in this world is to HIMSELF, and the word ‘himself’ includes those near and dear ones who have twined their tendrils around his heart. A man’s kindred are part of himself. He should not forget that when fighting for his own hand, he is fighting for them. His strength is their rampart. Their strength is his glory. The family and the individual are a unit."

Maybe there are some rare psychopaths out there that truly ARE islands, but I think the vast majority can relate to this.
redghost666 redghost666
31-35, M
10 Responses Dec 13, 2012

There is no one who is wired exactly like someone else, so truly this label is nothing but a generalization which can be called a fallacy, so we are fitting this label in many ways, it has been argued that emotions are just selfishness, and that selfishness is what drives all human actions. On another note, The ego should be extended to the entire creation if you come to an end of logic, you are the COSMOS, GOD, We are the Universe and EGOTHEISM is our true reality, therefor everyone is you, you will find this will break down social barriers and turn a "psychopath" into a loving person.

I really don't care for my family. I wish I could just kill them.

A childish sentiment. If you meant that, you simply would. As it is, that's a very immature, emo thing to say, and hopefully you'll grow out of it.

No, without them I wouldn't have any money to provide myself. And maybe it is immature, but I'm still a child. And if you knew them like I do, you would have understood, so don't come here and judge me.

Keep in mind, kid, that reality is about judgment. Don't play games with yourself. Remember that, and everything will be more clear.

love is just a word for attachment, you just said you are attached to them because they care for you. you love them you lovie dovie lover you. If they abuse you, that sucks, I was raped by a man and a women, and beaten, homeless, in states custudy, incarsirated, abandoned, abused, and almost killed by my my family growin up, does that make you "feel" better?

Well, I can't speak for them, but it sure put a smile on my face Shiva. :)

2 More Responses

Care in so much as we see family as a valuable asset, and the relationship to that family as a form of vanity. We care because we view them as an extension of our selves. Our blood runs in thier veins. We can argue that we feel love. But we know deep down it's not true. The only love we feel is vanity, posession and obsession. It's a selfish connection. Not a selfless one.

Ask yourself this. That "love" you say you have for your family. Is it any different to that "love" you might have for a favourite worn-in shirt?

Very interesting thoughts.

Thanks for your honesty.

I want to believe this, but I don't. A relative is a psychopath and he cares for no one but himself. He displays classic characteristics of psychopaths (charming, lies, etc). Sure, there may be some psychopaths that "care" for their family, but do they really "care" for them or keep them around so they can keep using them.

You can tell if they care for you by how much they give you for Christmas, if its massively over the top and more expensive then your gift, thats to show you they care for you beyond there inner selfishness.

I think you have to really ask yourself if you do love those peaople? or just crave the control of havignt hem in your life - these would feel similar I guess but are very different.

I understand your point, as I too believe that I feel love for my sister, nephew & friends and yes granted if anyone were to endager them I would react defensively. But if I am truly truly honest, is this just part of our functioning mechanisms? Have we spent so long trying to blend in and camofalge ourselves in this society that all thats really happened is that we've 'convinced' ourselves that we love these people.

If I am completely truthful, I really dont think I do love them, when I think of them I normally just draw a blank and woul I truly be destroyed if they weren't there? could I just walk away and be someone else? - yes.

This may just be me, but I think we have to becareful not confuse what we believe is love, with just a need to own, experience those we have around us...simply because if we didn't, we'd just be bored and have noone to watch.

I don't know if that's any different than it is for emotive people. What are their feelings for others besides things that help them function? I'm not a psychopath and I still think this might be true for everyone. It just seems like you're able to really look at the question of "Why am I relating to this person?" more objectively than most people.

Maybe you don't have the chemically induced excitement or same kind of attachment that people often have. But I don't really have that anymore either because I've taught myself that it's shallow and not meaningful to be driven to "love" someone by chemical interactions. Perhaps an innate lack of capacity for this is psychopathy - but that does not make you lack the capacity for a more abstract rational version which is what I think is a better one anyway.

No. By definition they care about no one, themselves included. Psychopaths are incapable of love and of loving; they literally lack the functional brain circuitry, and so are physically incapable. That's what makes them psychopaths. That's why they're *called* psychopaths. Truly loving anyone or anything immediately disqualifies you from being one.

Tinnah and Rage explained it well.

I think the "loving" that this refers to is the ****** weak kind and not a more abstract kind that should be ideal. Anyone should be able to have that kind because I think it should be a rational thing rather than chemically induced.

Cannot agree.... my Husband could not be more of a Psychopath. I fell in love with every part of Him. However.. and I do recognize we are an unusual case... He could not be more selfless when it comes to me. Has He really loved or even knew what love was before? No. The very definition of being a Psychopath insists that labels not be applied. Can Psychopaths truly, selflessly love? Hell yes. Let's refrain from drawing conclusions because of a few, or even many, cases. I know plenty of non - psychopathic people who cannot love like my Husband. Each individual defines his or her own personality, Psychopathic or not.

I absolutely do not deny the possessiveness.. and I love it. Just like you said, if it works, who can judge? We were made for each other... You know, Pro, I have argued that Psychopaths can love for a long time, and will continue to as long as I breathe.. and beyond.

That is certainly part of it.. but with us it is much, much deeper. It is impossible to say who longs for who more... our relationship is mutual ... and one of a kind. :)

I am smiling Pro. :)

I would like to add that my disagreement is toward Aegeans' comment, not with the author of this story or Ragnar. I do see truth in these comments. I am my Husband's heart. Fighting for me is the same as His fighting for Himself. My strength of Spirit is His glory. His strength in everything is mine. It is my comfort.
My point, which comes as no surprise to anyone that knows us, is that YES Psychopaths CAN absolutely truly love. It is not impossible.

3 More Responses

I agree. I love my family. I have not felt grief when some members have died. But when they were alive I loved them.

Sometimes I've met people that made a point to tell me (in regards to them sharing their time with me) that their kid comes first. I've always thought that was kind of a silly thing to say, and doesn't need to be said, because I've always felt like my child is a part of me, so there's no real distinction when it comes to 'competing for attention' or anything like that.

But I think such a perspective extends beyond mere ego. More than just identity. Perhaps that's just how it is when a child is really young, and I'm subject to biological instinct of some kind.

I'd think that the majority of (functional) psychopaths are NOT family annihilators.

What Ragnar Redbeard is describing there is actually classic psychopathic behaviour. Seeing ones family/'love ones' as an extension of oneself. An extension of the ego. An example would be family annihilators. If you genuinely love your family then you may not be a psychopath at all. Most people care about only a small number of people in any kind of deep way.

You hit it on the head. It's more of a territorial response. If their mother or child was crying because they tripped over a stump or anything else that can't be blamed on someone else they wouldn't care.