Maybe this is the wrong board for these questions, but I'm

> significant capacity for violence
What do you mean by that? Even normal humans without any disorders could do fucked up shit in a right situation. It probably helps if you have a right disorder, but it clearly aren't necessary or need to be exactly sociopathic one.

>>1455719
I suppose I mean that without the right disorder, they will be plagued to be held back by their consciousness. While normal people can do rather violent things, it does seem as though sociopathic nature is a bit more glorified in the modern day especially.

>>1455727
My guess here is that, modern society deals with a relatively faceless communities where empathy isn't that useful. The same reason why it is hard to be a serial killer in medieval times where everyone in the village would know everyone else.

>>1455704
It has its benefits, but also has lots of drawbacks. Since the benefits are obvious (if exaggerated), I'll just tell you about the drawbacks in a long-ass post that you'll likely not read. Because I'm bored and I feel like it, and I'd like to see how people would respond to it.

Lacking empathy means you see no reason to care about anything other than your own pleasure. This makes you an impulsive person with little-to-no tolerance for inconvenience, an utterly crippling handicap in a world where you can be thrown in the gutter for getting even a little uppity with superiors in the job world. In a school/college setting, it means you have quite a bit of trouble staying consistent with your studies, especially if they're in a topic you don't find interesting.

The Dunning-Kruger Effect affects everyone, and sociopaths are no exception. But sociopaths tend to have rather high opinions of themselves, so it hits them harder than it might hit most empaths. This is mitigated by the lack of shame, but only in the sense that it saves you embarrassment; it doesn't save you from your own incompetence.

[cont]

>>1455874

Sociopaths tend to have a rather weak grasp on social rules and expectations due to the lack of empathy. It's not nearly to the extent of an autistic person, since they do recognize social cues just as well as if not better than empaths, but they lack the intuitive understanding that most empaths have. This is made most obvious in moral issues. If you ask a sociopath if it's okay to kill a stranger for fun, then he'll say no, because he's been trained to do so since that's universally considered wrong by empaths and is solidly embedded in our social culture. But if you ask him a morality question that's more ambiguous, e.g. if he thinks it's okay to kill a robber in self-defense, he'll likely try to probe you to find the answer that you'd respond most favorably to, if he hasn't already. He won't give you an honest answer because he can't, since he lacks understanding of normal morality on a fundamental level.

You get the impression from media that sociopaths are these master manipulators who climb to the top of the social ladder with their ruthless manipulation and cunning, but the truth is that this requires a level of intelligence and discipline that most sociopaths simply do not possess. They're no smarter on average than empaths, and their discipline is comparatively abysmal. In fact, most sociopaths are losers who use their gifts to spend their lives going in and out of jail, or moving from house to house leeching off other people.

Honestly, being a sociopath kind of sucks. Life is boring and pointless if you have no capacity to care about anything, to the point where becoming a serial killer starts to become an appealing prospect just to get the edge of boredom off. And that's not even mentioning if your sociopathy is comorbid with some other disorder, which fucks things up even more.

tl;dr sociopathy is overrated

>>1455727
>While normal people can do rather violent things, it does seem as though sociopathic nature is a bit more glorified in the modern day especially.

Why do you think this? If anything, now is the time where remorseless violence and other traits typical of sociopathy are the most condemned. People used to be praised for being conquerors or for not ever showing fear, now it's considered a sign of psychosis. Sure, Trump is popular, and he is kind of a bully and a liar, but he doesn't really reach the level of sociopath.

>>1455874
>>1455875
>>1455885
This is rather useful. Part of what I was talking about with sociopathy being "glorified" is that any drawbacks are really ignored and never spoken of.
[spoiler]Then again, what do I even know. I've been up for a few days and I'm on Valium, so I'm not very good at formulating responses[/spoiler]

>>1455899
I think that's because the drawbacks are very obvious on a moral level, and discussion of the benefits is only to show "why" some people are like this; there's a reason sociopath (and psychopath) is an imprecise term that many clinicians do not use, and that mostly exists as an insult.

Largely mental disorders, look at and twin studies

>>1455704
I just watched a fun video on this. Don't know much about the guy who made it but its sources seem legit enough.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zViyZGmBhvs