Best psychologist biographies according to redditors

We found 294 Reddit comments discussing the best psychologist biographies. We ranked the 51 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top Reddit comments about Psychologist Biographies:

u/hak8or · 720 pointsr/todayilearned

The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat: And Other Clinical Tales is a fantastic series of real cases and a layman's explanation about what happened with people who had unusual mental situations. I really, really, really recommend it.

For example, people who have their perception of their body skewed, causing what is known as alien limb, where the limb you see attached to you does not seem to be your own, and sometimes tends to do things on its own because the feedback loop is broken. Those people tend to either amputate the limb or fall into extreme depression and end up taking their own life.

Edit: $11 bucks off amazon with prime for a paperback version. Linked to amazon smile version.

Edit 2: Another reccomendation by /u/pulgasvestidas link to post and Smile link to book

u/Rwinterhalter · 643 pointsr/askscience

Nearly everyone hallucinates at some point in their life. It's quite common and most cases are not associated with drug intake or mental illness. And a variety of physical or mental stimuli and practices can reliably induce hallucinatory states in most individuals. Some kinds of hallucinations in very young children, for example, can be a normal part of development.

However, just because drugs or mental illness are not the cause of most hallucinations it does not mean that they're medically irrelevant. Spontaneously hallucinating for no discernible reason is not unheard of, but rare compared to cases where a cause can be determined.

For a scientific overview of the matter I suggest Oliver Sacks book "Hallucinations." He's a great writer and famed for his work in the treatment of a variety of neurological disorders (I think Robin Williams played his character in "Awakenings.")

http://www.amazon.com/Hallucinations-Oliver-Sacks-ebook/dp/B0082XLY6G/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1396330412&sr=1-1&keywords=hallucinations

u/rnaa49 · 423 pointsr/politics

Avoidance of responsibility is a primary characteristic of psychopathy. He ticks off all the other checkmarks, too. Only libel laws are protecting his ass from being called a psychopath openly. Educate yourselves about psychopaths -- I recommend these books I have read to understand my own lifelong contact with psychopaths, starting with my mother:
Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us
Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work
Confessions of a Sociopath: A Life Spent Hiding in Plain Sight
The Psychopath Test: A Journey Through the Madness Industry
The Inner World of the Psychopath: A definitive primer on the psychopathic personality

He is commonly called a narcissist, but here's a handy rule of thumb. Not all narcissists are psychopaths, but all psychopaths are narcissistic. It's easy to understand why -- they don't see humans as humans, only objects to be manipulated for fun and profit. They, themselves, are the only conscious being, so nothing else matters. Their brains aren't wired to understand we have minds and memories, which is why they lie constantly to achieve their immediate needs. Strangely, the inability to experience emotions (and that includes fear, which is why Trump seems to never give a fuck about consequences) comes with no sense of past or future. There is only the "now."

1% of the population are psychopaths. You know more than one. Some say it's an evolutionary adaptation that exploits humans with emotions and morals, and that they are "intraspecies predators." There are professions that rely on psychopathic behavior, and you can draw your own opinions on them:
The Wisdom of Psychopaths: What Saints, Spies, and Serial Killers Can Teach Us About Success

It is also commonly said that psychopaths are experts are reading people. This is false (because, to them, there is nothing to read). They are simply experts, from lifelong experience and practice, at putting people into situations with predictable reactions. For example, Trump likes to insult people because he knows it distracts them and takes them off their game as they try to defend themselves. Psychopaths like to do their manipulating in the background and behind peoples' backs (and in Trump's case, behind NDAs and hush money), thus Trump's biggest problem -- he's the world's most watched person and nothing goes unnoticed, so his previous tactics aren't working. He is thrashing more and more as he gets more desperate to deceive. He is not losing his mind or getting senile. He's a psychopath who can't understand why his old tricks are no longer working.

His apparent "humanness" is a practiced façade, as is true for all psychopaths. They learn, starting in childhood, how to fit in. Some learn how better than others. Trump is good enough at it to fool a large number of voters.
BTW, there's nothing saying a psychopath can't also be dumb as a brick or illiterate.

u/scootter82 · 114 pointsr/videos

The Psychopath Test and The Sociopath Next Door both touch on the subject that many CEOs express psychopathic qualities or tendencies.

u/bmobula · 72 pointsr/IAmA

We seem to be programmed in our culture - perhaps by western religious and philosophical traditions - to accept dualism, which is the notion that mind and body are separate. However, several centuries of scientific progress have demonstrated more or less incontrovertibly the material basis of consciousness, thought, emotion, memory, and personality.

You ARE your brain. That is all there is to it.

What is particularly fascinating is how individual parts of the brain can be altered (i.e. damaged) with the result that parts of you are altered.

Oliver Sacks has several fascinating books that discuss case studies of neurological deficit, written for a popular audience, and they are each wonderful. Here are two of them:

http://www.amazon.com/Man-Who-Mistook-His-Wife/dp/0684853949

http://www.amazon.com/Anthropologist-Mars-Seven-Paradoxical-Tales/dp/0679756973/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1319305698&sr=1-1

u/superconfusedlurker · 57 pointsr/videos

The Psychopath Test, by Jon Ronson goes into length about the predatory tactics of psychopaths.

>he was projecting a warning to back off.

I immediately thought of one of the interviews Ronson did with a serial killer who was insistent on keeping specific boundaries.

u/imiiiiik · 40 pointsr/askscience

The book on CEOs having it at a higher rate than the general public.


It certainly implies that very bad things happen to the public because of CEOs like that.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Psychopath-Test-Journey-Industry/dp/1594485755/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1368106143&sr=8-1&keywords=ceo+psychopath

u/chookarooki · 39 pointsr/AskReddit
u/1nfiniterealities · 28 pointsr/socialwork

Texts and Reference Books

Days in the Lives of Social Workers

DSM-5

Child Development, Third Edition: A Practitioner's Guide

Racial and Ethnic Groups

Social Work Documentation: A Guide to Strengthening Your Case Recording

Cognitive Behavior Therapy: Basics and Beyond

[Thoughts and Feelings: Taking Control of Your Moods and Your Life]
(https://www.amazon.com/Thoughts-Feelings-Harbinger-Self-Help-Workbook/dp/1608822087/ref=pd_sim_14_3?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=3ZW7PRW5TK2PB0MDR9R3)

Interpersonal Process in Therapy: An Integrative Model

[The Clinical Assessment Workbook: Balancing Strengths and Differential Diagnosis]
(https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0534578438/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_38?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ARCO1HGQTQFT8)

Helping Abused and Traumatized Children

Essential Research Methods for Social Work

Navigating Human Service Organizations

Privilege: A Reader

Play Therapy with Children in Crisis

The Color of Hope: People of Color Mental Health Narratives

The School Counseling and School Social Work Treatment Planner

Streets of Hope : The Fall and Rise of an Urban Neighborhood

Deviant Behavior

Social Work with Older Adults

The Aging Networks: A Guide to Programs and Services

[Grief and Bereavement in Contemporary Society: Bridging Research and Practice]
(https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0415884810/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1)

Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy

Motivational Interviewing: Helping People Change

Ethnicity and Family Therapy

Human Behavior in the Social Environment: Perspectives on Development and the Life Course

The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work

Generalist Social Work Practice: An Empowering Approach

Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association

The Dialectical Behavior Therapy Skills Workbook

DBT Skills Manual for Adolescents

DBT Skills Manual

DBT Skills Training Handouts and Worksheets

Social Welfare: A History of the American Response to Need

Novels

[A People’s History of the United States]
(https://www.amazon.com/Peoples-History-United-States/dp/0062397346/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1511070674&sr=1-1&keywords=howard+zinn&dpID=51pps1C9%252BGL&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch)


The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat

The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time

Life For Me Ain't Been No Crystal Stair

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

Tuesdays with Morrie

The Death Class <- This one is based off of a course I took at my undergrad university

The Quiet Room

Girl, Interrupted

I Never Promised You a Rose Garden

Flowers for Algernon

Of Mice and Men

A Child Called It

Go Ask Alice

Under the Udala Trees

Prozac Nation

It's Kind of a Funny Story

The Perks of Being a Wallflower

The Yellow Wallpaper

The Bell Jar

The Outsiders

To Kill a Mockingbird

u/nezumipi · 23 pointsr/NoStupidQuestions

People are incredibly good at justifying their beliefs and actions.

People are masters of saying, I'm not X, I'm just X-1. "I'm not an alcoholic; I'm just a guy who likes a fifth of scotch with breakfast." "I'm not a wife beater; that bitch just needs to learn some respect." "I'm not a sexist, I just think neuroscience proves men are better."

The reasoning starts something like this: A "racist" is a monster, and I'm not a monster, so I'm not racist. And if I'm not a racist, then there must be some other reason why I believe these things. Maybe I'll claim to hate everyone equally. Maybe I'll rely on religion. Maybe I'll say I truly believe in separate but equal.

There's a reason racist forums spend so much time posting about "evidence" that supports their beliefs. They feel that if they can "prove" it, then they're just realists, not racists. (Conversely, you'll notice that /r/biology doesn't spend an inordinate amount of time posting evidence that genes are the main mode of inheritance. They believe it, but they're don't need to be defensive about it.)

So, yeah, there might be some people on there who think of themselves as "racist", but I'm guessing most of them would say they are not.

If you want to learn more about how we trick ourselves about our beliefs, I would recommend The Unpersuadables and Thinking, Fast and Slow.

u/CNoTe820 · 22 pointsr/videos

Not prison per se but Sudhir Venkatesh did a great book about the underground economy of NYC.

https://www.amazon.com/Floating-City-Sociologist-Underground-Economy/dp/1594204160

What's interesting is that unlike places like Chicago where criminals just kind of stay and deal drugs in their own neighborhood, in NYC they float (hence the book name) all over the city and across different social and economic groups.

u/Henry_Rowengartner · 22 pointsr/trashy

Your old boss was right and if you're interested in reading about this topic more I would highly recommend reading The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson. There's a lot of fascinating info in this book about psychopaths and how they operate and there is a section that talks about the fact that there is a higher rate of psychopaths among CEO's compared to the general public. Unfortunately, in business it does tend to be beneficial to only care about yourself and what you can gain and to not have any qualms about screwing people over to benefit yourself and the company.

u/Nicoscope · 12 pointsr/OneY

In his autobiography, Carl Jung puts forth a similar idea. Later in his life, he had came to the conclusion that both partners should each have a room exclusively for themselves, where the other isn't allowed to enter.

His idea was that, for each partner to keep evolving, they need to retain a part of solitary individuality; a part of the self that is independent and unaffected by the relationship. That is what the "exclusive room" was meant to achieve.

I think a lot of young couples would have trouble with that kind of arrangement. Our culture puts so much romantic emphasis on fusional relationships, being able to say "we share everything!" almost becomes a requirement to consider the relationship successful.

Personally, I tend to agree with Jung's idea. I'd definitely require a mancave for myself. I'm used to requiring lot of time to be by myself, regardless of my dating status. So much so that it had me backed out of moving in with a girlfriend more than once. I'd have absolutely no problem with my SO having a womancave neither.

Why do you think so many couples starts experiencing difficulties once they move in together? It's not just the trivial things like fighting over the toilet seat or the dishes. A lot has to do with not having any space to be by yourself at your own home.

u/Kurtish · 12 pointsr/neuro

I'm not sure if this is exactly the kind of book you're looking for, but The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat has always been one of my favorites. I think it does a good job of walking through a lot of history and basic neuroscience in the context of some pretty bizarre neurological disorders. Here's a full text if you wanna give it a look.

u/AmaDaden · 12 pointsr/todayilearned

The book was The Psychopath Test: A Journey Through the Madness Industry. Your right and I wish this was higher up so people could see it. I'll make this bold so people can see it THEY KNEW HE WAS FAKING THE WHOLE TIME. The author talked to the psychologists who reviewed his case.

u/[deleted] · 12 pointsr/technology

I think you may be referring the The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson. Here's the Daily Show segment. Here is an excellent episode of This American Life about the book. It covers the psychopath as CEO thing.

u/jms3r · 11 pointsr/AskReddit

read the book the psychopath test apparently glibness / superficial charm is a very strong indicator of psychopathy

I think the biggest warning flag is if a person has a clear sense of humour and such but, as with this kid, never seems to quite have their shit together in certain areas

u/StamosLives · 11 pointsr/pics

Note - The previous comment contained a list of "statistics" with links to why black people commit more crimes.

This is fallacious logic and an attempt to use base statistics without understanding or evaluating the statistics on a critical level.

TL:DR - Assuming black people commit more crimes, or "racially profiling," is a terrible cycle based off of fallacious logic and spurious data.

Spend even a little time in sociology and you will learn very quickly that the statistics behind male black arrests in the United States (1 in 4 black men have been in prison) and white male arrests is ridiculously skewed.

The notion of "stereotypes exist for a reason" is an unreasonable argument. Naturally, if you GO LOOKING FOR CRIME you are going to find it. That's the inherent nature of why there is racial bias to begin with. There are also less police officers patrolling areas that are dominated by whites which leads to a significantly smaller statistics regarding white crime.

Want an awesome book to read? The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison.

Want to talk about more forms of racial profiling in the justice system? Powdered cocaine, predominantly used by those who are more wealthy and likely to be white carries a minimum sentence of around 1 year. Crack cocaine, known to be predominantly used by those who are of a lower socio-economic class and typically of color, carries a minimum sentence of around 5 years.

Part of the problem is that many neighborhoods that fit under a certain "cultural stereotype" fit into the sociological description of "anomie." Anomie is the state in which one lacks "social norms." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anomie

"Anomie arises more generally from a mismatch between personal or group standards and wider social standards, or from the lack of a social ethic, which produces moral deregulation and an absence of legitimate aspirations."

Want another great book to read? Check out Gang Leader for a Day:
http://www.amazon.com/Gang-Leader-Day-Sociologist-Streets/dp/B004E3XDFI

The stories told in Gang Leader for a Day are similar to those seen in The Wire and to my own upbringing regarding friends who essentially "live black."

In essence, racial profiling finds "more crime" among black individuals because it associates the actions that take place in projected neighborhoods, drug selling and usage, and poverty-like situations with breaking the law. Whereas if we actually targeted white collar crimes, police would be patrolling factories and businesses.

"For the same criminal behavior, the poor are more likely to be arrested; if arrested, they are more likely to be charged; if charged, more likely to be convicted; if convicted, more likely to be sentenced to prison; and if sentenced, more likely to be given longer prison terms than members of the middle and upper classes." - Jeffrey Reiman

"And yet, the problem with racial profiling is precisely the misguided use of statistical discrimination in situations where there are potential feedback effects. The problem is that our customary and ordinary forms of rationality, our “odds reasoning,” our daily uses of statistical discrimination are leading us astray. Race is the miner’s canary that signals—or should signal—the larger problems of statistical discrimination and profiling. And until we properly understand the problems of statistical discrimination writ large, I fear that we will make little progress on racial profiling. " - Julius Kreeger, speaking at Harvard

u/ergonomicsalamander · 10 pointsr/booksuggestions

Oliver Sacks is a neurologist who writes gripping nonfiction about bizarre conditions. Two great ones to check out are The Island of the Colorblind and The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat

u/zakats · 10 pointsr/verizon

DM doesn't just stand for District Manager, it also stands for Dick-Move. Upper management types and such tend to skew heavier toward narcissism than the general populace fwiw. (see The Psychopath Test)

u/MewsashiMeowimoto · 9 pointsr/bloomington

There are two sort of relevant standards involved. First is competency, which is whether a defendant is or can be made to be competent to stand trial- basically, are they too crazy to assist in their own defense, understand what is happening in the court proceeding, etc.? Second is an insanity defense, basically, were they insane at the time that they committed the offense to the extent that they didn't understand what it was that they were doing?

Both require examination and testimony from a psychiatrist to establish, and they're generally pretty hard to fake. There can also be consequences for faking that aren't great- such was the subject of Jon Ronson's book, The Psychopath Test. Fascinating read: https://www.amazon.com/Psychopath-Test-Journey-Through-Industry/dp/1594485755

u/DAM1313 · 9 pointsr/news

If you want to learn more about sociopaths in a simplified but still good form, read this book.

As for what I said, if you're confident in your ability to detect a sociopath by his or her appearance, someone who's able to disguise those traits will be able to play off your misplaced confidence in them if they passed your test.

u/theestranger · 9 pointsr/AskReddit

For a slightly lighter - yet no less disturbing - read, check out The Psychopath Test. Blew my mind.

u/rach2K · 8 pointsr/AskReddit

I really recommend reading the Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Psychopath-Test-Jon-Ronson/dp/0330492268). He talks about meeting psychopaths, and the ways in which they're different from normal people.

u/HoneyD · 8 pointsr/socialism

I'm glad you asked! This Che manga was absolutely hilarious to read. Really goofy stuff.

This comic about Lenin was pretty cool too, though it was a lot more educational than the last one. There's also one on Marx by the same publishing company.

u/221bbs · 8 pointsr/askphilosophy

Here are a few suggestions:

u/dodli · 8 pointsr/booksuggestions

A few graphic novels:

  1. From Hell - Cerebral, philosophical, and fastidiously researched, this is the story of the most notorious of them all, Jack the Ripper. Masterful, somber drawings and brilliant writing, if a little too high brow for my taste.
  2. My Friend Dahmer - You won't find gore here, nor a particularly engaging plot. What you will find is authentic autobiographical vignettes written by an actual school mate of Jeffry Dahmer's that try to shed some light on the early years of this nefarious, but fascinating serial killer, but mostly seem to be an outlet for the author to process his own emotions with regards to having known and been friends with such a monster. It's not a very compelling read, i'm afraid, but on the bright side, it's quite short and the artwork is cool.
  3. The Green River Killer - An account of the investigation of the Green River murders, focusing on one of the lead detectives, who happens to be the author's father. Nice artwork, so-so plot.
  4. Miss Don't Touch Me - An absolutely delightful fictional novel that takes place in early 20th century Paris. It is fast-moving, suspenseful, sexy and hugely entertaining. Great artwork and a fun story. Highly recommended!

    A couple more books that are on my wish list, though i haven't read them yet, are:

u/zlhill · 7 pointsr/medicine

You would appreciate anything by Oliver Sacks. He was a celebrated neurologist who wrote a bunch of great books about consciousness and fascinating stories about conditions he saw in his practice from a very philosophical rather than strictly clinical point of view. You could start with The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat, Hallucinations, or Awakenings. He gave a nice TED talk if you want to get a taste for it.

u/intravenus_de_milo · 7 pointsr/DebateReligion

To go further, it's normal to hear voices depending on the circumstances. Oliver Sacks covers this in his recent book Hallucinations

Whether or not these voices are interpreted as supernatural in origin is due to cultural or personal biases.

u/sweetflag · 7 pointsr/occult

Yes. My introduction to him was Low Magick: It's All In Your Head ... You Just Have No Idea How Big Your Head Is, which is more of a Cosmic Trigger-style autobiographical type piece, yet sort-of an initiation manual in disguise. That or My Life With The Spirits: The Adventures of a Modern Magician, which is his actual autobiography, are great jumping-off points for the newly interested.

u/stillnotking · 7 pointsr/funny

Really thought-provoking book. If you like that chapter, it gets a lot of its material from another book, Gang Leader For a Day, which I found even more interesting.

u/axm59 · 6 pointsr/Neuropsychology

I have this sitting on my shelf waiting to be read

It was suggested reading for a Neuropsychology course that I had to drop.

u/ardaitheoir · 6 pointsr/Harmontown

Well this was an ... exuberant start to the episode. The song is "On My Radio" by The Selecter. There's a delightful music video for it. Jeff's musical choices are particularly peppy this week.

They're on segment overdrive! Things Dan Shouldn't Be Allowed to Complain About, Connor's Conundrums, Jeff Describes People -- even an Evernote update (Dan abandoned Evernote temporarily for some reason) and the riffed My Favorite Cereals.

Blindness + flight is a dealbreaker. I'd want to fly almost exclusively to see stuff. I'd pick blindness over deafness, though, because I couldn't do without music and the human voice in general. There's still the internet ... I'd have to give up gifs, though. I'd prefer losing my hearing over being born deaf because I could at least recall my favorite music and have an easier time speaking.

Siike returns! The procedure he's talking about is apparently called endovascular coiling, and the procedure is pretty fascinating. I'm kind of reminded of some patients in The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat, such as the titular man who couldn't identify everyday objects or people by sight. Great guest segment, of course.

I love Jeff's invocation of a centurion as a Hollywood archetype. It just puts the perfect picture in your head.

The metagaming discussion is taken up once more -- this time in gory detail. Their confusion is kind of amusing ... it's not the most difficult concept, especially for people who either are or work with actors.

u/theinternetftw · 6 pointsr/gaming

Thanks.

And thank you for reminding me that I have the Man who Mistook his Wife for a Hat tucked away in my room somewhere from when I entered Borders Books and Music™ at a weak moment and left with too many books to start at once. The Sacks book is now next in line, followed by Bowling Alone and Grand Theft Childhood.

u/wendelgee2 · 6 pointsr/nfl

I didn't believe this until I read "Gang Leader for a Day" and you see how fucking corrupt and complicit the cops are.

u/Pizza_bagel · 6 pointsr/todayilearned

I first read about it in The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson, where he goes in depth and interviews some of the participants and administrators.

u/subtextual · 5 pointsr/Neuropsychology

These sound like pretty normal hynagogic hallucinations to me (they do not have to be associated with any sleep paralysis).

However, I am not an MD and do not specialize in sleep disorders. A sleep study as others have suggested is a good idea... since you're in the Boston area, here are the major sleep centers in Boston, and here is a website where you can search for other accredited sleep centers.

I also second the recommendation for Sack's book Hallucinations to get some probably-reassuring perspective on how common hallucinations really are.

As for the 3AM thing, it's likely just coincidence (and your mind 'dismissing' times when you've woken at times other than 3AM), but another thing to check is if there is something that is happening routinely at 3AM that might be waking you. As a kid I always thought it was weird that I woke up at 2:14 every night, until I finally figured out that this was the exact time that a really loud cargo plane flew over my house every night (lived by the airport). Maybe a train going past, or a neighbor leaving for their morning shift, or the heat clicking on in your building, etc. More plausible explanation than the supernatural, at least! ;)

u/double-happiness · 5 pointsr/unitedkingdom

I'm a sociology graduate and former social science teacher and lecturer, I don't think I need to read introductory books on Marxism, thanks all the same. This was always my favourite actually, it's almost 30 years since I read it! (Not that edition though)

u/vwwvwwv · 5 pointsr/occult

He had a natural, inherited inclination toward mystical/supernatura experience. Jung's maternal grandfather was a pastor and possible schizophrenic who "trained" his young daughter (Jung's mother) to ward off evil spirits while he worked on his sermons. As a child, Jung witnessed his mother in conversation with spirits in her room as he hid behind the door. This contrasted with the beliefs of his father, who was also a pastor and had Jung's mother sent to an asylum for long periods at a time. From an early age, Jung had an extremely active dream life, was a strong introvert who spent his free time communing with nature in the woods near his house, and developed many peculiar rituals to protect himself from negative influences. In school he realized he had the power to create and overcome his own neurosis, but he became convinced that he had two personalities: one, a regular Swiss child who followed the boring rules of society, and two, a mysterious 17th century nobleman who was wise and respected scholar with mystical powers (possibly influenced by the legacy of Jung's paternal grandfather, a famous Swiss physician, 33rd degree Freemason, and possible illegitimate child of Goethe). In college, Jung organized seances with his mother and cousin, who seemed a talented medium, to contact the spirit world, and learned how to put himself in a controlled trance and evoke hallucinations.

So you could say Jung was predestined to become who he was. I wrote a bio on Jung in college and obviously it was incredibly fascinating. It's also interesting to see how he changed after college:

Jung at one point realized that his cousin had been faking her medium experiences, after he caught her repeating some stories he had given her to read while she was supposedly channeling a spirit. He became disillusioned and wrote his master's thesis "On the psychology and pathology of so-called occult phenomena", in which he basically labelled his cousin as mentally ill and managed to hide all the details of his own involvement. Soon after this he got a job at a world-renowned mental hospital (Burgholzli), working under the "discoverer" of schizophrenia, Eugene Bleuler, and focused purely on mainstream psychiatry for years, in which he became a famous researcher in his own right. Only after meeting Freud later on did he become interested in psychoanalysis, which eventually led him to study the mythological content of schizophrenic hallucinations. This contributed to his theory of the collective unconscious ("how else could schizophrenics show similar thematology all over the world?") and, I think, gradually reawakened his interest in the occult. I think that tension between keeping up appearances as a mainstream psychiatrist but wanting to explore the deeper truths of mankind was a huge stressor on his psyche, so that when the dams finally burst, he did a complete 180 and got lost in his own mind for a good while. During his "confrontation with the unconscious" he refined his technique of "active imagination", which combined the trance techniques he already knew with the free association methods he had developed as a psychiatrist.

A great read for understanding Jung's life and the development of his thought processes is his quasi-autobiography, Memories, Dreams, and Reflections.

http://www.amazon.ca/Memories-Dreams-Reflections-C-G-Jung/dp/0679723951

u/brijjen · 5 pointsr/books

Books like The Brain that Changes Itself, Phantoms in the Brain and The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat are all really great reads. They're different cases and accounts of patients treated by the authors who are, I believe, neuroscientists and psychologists. I learned a LOT about how the brain works and relates to the body - but I'll warn you, when you see how flawed our perceptions of the world can be (how easily damaged, fooled or changed), you may have a slight existential crisis. I did. :)

u/apostrotastrophe · 5 pointsr/booksuggestions

If you're a Nick Hornby fan, here's what you should do - he's got three books that are little collections of the column he writes for The Believer called "Stuff I've Been Reading". They're hilarious, and each one gives you 5 or 6 great suggestions from a guy whose taste is pretty solid.

Start with The Polysyllabic Spree and then go to Housekeeping vs. the Dirt and Shakespeare Wrote for Money.

He's always saying his favourite author is Anne Tyler - I can corroborate, she's pretty good.

This isn't really "literature" but you also might like Mil Millington. He's funny in the same way and even though as I'm reading I'm like "huh.. this isn't that great" his novels are the ones that I end up reading in one 8 hour sitting.

You might like David Sedaris - I'd start with Me Talk Pretty One Day

And someone else said John Irving - he's my very favourite.

A good psychology book (and I'm a major layperson, so it's definitely accessible) is The Man Who Mistook his Wife for a Hat by Oliver Sacks and Mad in America by Robert Whitaker.

u/twocats · 5 pointsr/Romania

Si eu am kindle si vad ca primele 30 carti din el sunt numai de design si ceva self-help (Confessions of an introvert is quite good), plus ebook-urile /r/nosleep.

Citesc mai mult nonfictiune, beletristica rar, si mi-au placut teribil Fast Food Nation, Zero: The biography of a dangerous idea si The man who mistook his wife for a hat.

Si va urasc cu profilele si recomandarile voastre ca am ales deja 6 carti de la voi pe care vreau sa le citesc si n-am timp.

u/whostherat · 5 pointsr/neuroscience

I am super interested with no background too! I read Neuroscience For Dummies on my kindle. The format was a little wonky, so I recommend getting the paperback. It was interesting and a semi-easy read. I went to Star Talk with Neil deGrasse Tyson and the topic was The Science of the Mind. It was great! I chatted with Cara Santa Maria and asked about her recommendations for interesting neuroscience books. She said I'd love The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat. I've been meaning to read it! Also, checkout Amazon's best sellers in Neuroscience. Read reviews and see if they fit your interest. Let me know if you find anything interesting.

u/live3orfry · 5 pointsr/WTF

Sorry people are downvoting you. I gave you a couple of ups. I was pretty sure you were joking but the Chicago pd is considered one of the most corrupt in the country. You should read Gang Leader for a Day. Good stuff.

http://www.amazon.com/Gang-Leader-Day-Sociologist-Streets/dp/1594201501

u/Khif · 5 pointsr/Music

But is there someone who said that? If you prefer a logic guy, the one you're defending, like you, misread "probably" as "always" to make his case.

This book, though, would tell you that there are more psychopaths working as CEOs than in any other profession, another placing an estimate of psychopathy in CEOs at four times the average (at 4%). Here's a study I haven't actually read echoing those findings.

While neither are exactly terms happily used by medical psychology, let's put down a bit of vague bullshit and say psychopaths are rarer, overclocked versions of a sociopaths. Logic would then dictate that in professions you'll find psychopaths involved in, you'll find even more sociopaths. By a reasonable, subjective definition of the unreasonable, totally subjective word, say, 20% prevalence of sociopathic behavior in business CEOs would sound like a very low estimate. With big companies in particular, I'd guess we're dealing with much higher numbers, which would lead to a logical formula of either highly successful CEO-ship implying sociopathic behavior, or vice versa.

The very concept of a working-as-intended corporation is often likened to psychopathy, one of the primary cases made by a documentary called The Corporation.

u/thedancingj · 5 pointsr/booksuggestions

The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson is an awesome non-fiction book about psychopathy and the "madness industry." I also second The Devil in the White City!

u/keithmac20 · 5 pointsr/worldnews

Somewhat related, I highly recommend The Psychopath Test; there is a portion of the book that considers the idea that CEO's and people in high positions of power have many of the personality traits that define psychopaths. In general it's a great read.

u/ancepsinfans · 5 pointsr/storyandstyle

While I like the care you give to the subject, I would just like to fill in some cracks with a few resources. I have a background in AbPsych and one of my mentors did a lot of interesting work with real life psychopaths.

The baseline for psychopathy was first and best (so far) laid out by Robert Hare. This site has a nice explanation.

Two great books on the subject (non-fiction) are: The Anatomy of Evil and The Science of Evil. Something more in the popsci vein would also be Jon Ronson’s The Psychopath Test, though I have some personal qualms with Ronson’s view.

For fiction, there’s of course any of the works mentioned in the original post, as well as American Psycho and We Need to Talk about Kevin.

u/billyjohn · 5 pointsr/science
u/mathent · 5 pointsr/politics

Thanks for the book, I'm going to add it to my list. Have you read The Psychopath Test as well?

u/didyouwoof · 4 pointsr/booksuggestions

The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat by Oliver Sacks is an interesting collection of case studies of people with unusual neurological conditions. Oliver Sacks is both a brilliant scientist and a great storyteller.

u/itty53 · 4 pointsr/Documentaries

There was a study (of a sort) done a few years back that showed the incidence of psychopathy was something like 4x among CEOs than it is in the general populace (4% rather than 1%). I say 'of a sort' because it wasn't really held to stringent standards; it was simply for this guy's book.

And let me stop the train here: I am not saying this as a put-down to corporate environments or executives; I am not against 'big business' or high-paid executives. It's just that a functional sociopath would be an extremely good CEO or other executive position, so it would make sense that these people would 'filter to the top' in a corporate environment.

On that note, and along with the point of applying the "demon" term being unfair, this is a great quote from that article linked:

> I can look at, say, Dominique Strauss Kahn, who, if one assumes that what one is hearing about him is true, certainly he hits a huge amount of items on the checklist — the $30,000 suits, the poor behavioral controls, the impulsivity, the promiscuous sexual behavior. But of course when you say this you’re in terrible danger of being seduced by the checklist, which I really like to add as a caveat. It kind of turns you into a bit of a psychopath yourself in that that you start to shove people into that box. It robs you of empathy and your connection to human beings.

To use a quote from the Amazon page: As the study of psychology evolves, we're going to more and more see that "relatively ordinary people are .. defined by their maddest edges". I'm not entirely sure about how good I feel about that, but I do feel it is getting truer every day.

u/sensicle · 3 pointsr/Glitch_in_the_Matrix

You're right that hallucinations come in many forms and manifest for a variety of different reasons that are not "psychiatric" in their origins.

The late Oliver Sacks' book, Hallucinations, really opened my eyes to this.

u/chillage · 3 pointsr/Neuropsychology

I would recommend this great book http://www.amazon.com/Hallucinations-Oliver-Sacks/dp/0307957241

It should alleviate your worries about whether what's going on is something exceptionally unusual. Particularly there are a couple chapters in there devoted to various hallucinations around sleep. You'll find that these things, while not common, are not entirely uncommon either

u/Hidden_Gecko · 3 pointsr/gaming

You should consider reading The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson if you haven't already. Hell, everyone should, it's not a big book and it's a great read!

u/lionandmen · 3 pointsr/whatsthatbook

Is it the Book of Woe? ?

u/bumblyjack · 3 pointsr/Christianity

Carl Jung said himself that he consulted with a spirit guide he referred to as "Philemon". He wrote about him in the book Memories, Dreams, Reflections. I advise that you look at a copy of the book.


Here are two articles that briefly describe some of what Jung says about Philemon: Who is Philemon? and Mystical Experiences of Carl Jung.

u/mrsamsa · 3 pointsr/skeptic

I don't think there will ever be a perfect rule that can be applied across all possibilities without fail, but for me one of the major things I look for is whether the author is a respected scientist actively working in the field (or, if they're retired, had an active history in the field).

So your Gazzaniga and Brown books I wouldn't even hesitate to recommend to others, without even having read them. It helps that I've read other books by those authors and their research, but their names alone are enough for me to give them a tick. Of course that doesn't guarantee that they're good books, but if you're asking for a rule on how to judge a book before reading it, then that's probably going to result in more success than failure.

The second thing I look for is whether the author has a history of writing polemics and intentionally controversial books in order to increase sales (a sort of "clickbait" approach to books), and whether their names are associated with criticism for misrepresenting basic issues in the areas they discuss. As such, people like Gladwell and Pinker would be ruled out by this.

>I'd also love to hear /r/skeptic 's suggestions for reading specifically about learning, drive, motivation, discipline...

My personal suggestions would be:

Understanding Behaviorism - William Baum (touches a little more on rigorous academic work rather than being a purely pop work, but still has some good pop chapters).

The Science of Self-Control - Howard Rachlin

Breakdown of Will - George Ainslie

Some related books but not directly on those topics:

The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat - Oliver Sacks (It's a cliche suggestion but still a good book).

Brainwashed: The Seductive Appeal of Mindless Neuroscience - Sally Satel and Scott Lilienfeld (More methodological issues with neuroscience research and reporting).

Delusion of Gender - Cordelia Fine (Critical look at some of the research on gender differences).

u/Y_pestis · 3 pointsr/booksuggestions

Not quite the same as your examples, but some of my favorite non-fiction science are...

The Coming Plague

And The Band Played On

The Disappearing Spoon

The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat

I could probably come up with a few others if any of these seem to be what interests you.

u/GodOfAtheism · 3 pointsr/AskReddit

Reefer Madness is about not only the causes behind marijuana being illegal, but also problems with migrant labor, and pornography.

Nickle and Dimed is about, basically, how minimum wage sucks a big fat one.

The Man who mistook his wife for a hat is about people with varying neurological disorders, and I think is just cool in general.

u/LieselMeminger · 3 pointsr/AskReddit

Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers by Mary Roach. The writing is so good you won't care about the squeamish content.

The Poisoner's Handbook by Deborah Blum. A perfect blend of a historical retelling and science.

A Treasury of Deception by Michael Farguhar.

The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat by Oliver Sacks. Short stories of the mentally abnormal patients of Sacks.

My Stroke of Insight by Jill Taylor. Very good insight on what it is like to live with, and recover from brain damage. Also talks science about parts of the brain as a nice intro to the subject.

Mutants: On Genetic Variety in the Human Body by Armand Leroi.

And of course,
Cosmos by Carl Sagan.

u/MattieShoes · 3 pointsr/AskWomen

I'm subscribed to lots of book subreddits, so I assumed one of those... Saw it was askwomen and my first thought was "I bet Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman isn't on any of their lists." Thank you for proving me wrong! :-D


So for kicks, I'll recommend "The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat" to you. It's neurology case studies from Oliver Sacks (The doctor from Awakenings, played by Robin Williams), written for laymen. That shit is fascinating!

u/Mousafir · 3 pointsr/hypnosis

Any book that take a scientific look on how we perceive and integrate stimulu. (Here is my choice).

Any Oliver Sacks book. Understanding the broken brain is a very good tool to get the healthy one.(start with this one)

There is that Crash Course Psychology.

For me it's a good to understand what are attention and perception, what is it to learn and the importance of working memory. You can get all that without understanding memory, but it would be interesting to.

It can be cool to have a general idea of when our brain use shortcut because it's important not to waste energy.

And then for the social side of it welcome to the field of influence.

For a bit of history, the declassified documents are on the source section.

u/TransparentBicycle · 3 pointsr/nyc

Recently read Floating City, a book on the underground world of drugs/sex trafficking in NYC. I'm convinced at least 50% of these boutiques are drug fronts or prostitution ring headquarters for rich heiresses and heirs.

u/randysgoiter · 3 pointsr/JoeRogan

I'm in the middle of Homo Deus currently. Its great so far, Yuval is a great writer and his books are a lot more accessible than traditional history books. I'm sure there are a lot of liberties taken with some of the history but I think Sapiens is a must-read. Homo Deus is more assumption based on current reality but its very interesting so far.

Gulag Archipelago is one I read based on the recommendation of Jordan Peterson. Awesome book if you are into WW1-WW2 era eastern europe. being an eastern european myself, i devour everything related to it so this book tickled my fancy quite a bit. good look into the pitfalls of what peterson warns against.

Black Earth: The Holocaust as History and Warning is another history book discussing that time period and how it all transpired and the lesser known reasons why WW2 went down the way it did. some surprising stuff in that book related to hitler modeling europe around how the united states was designed at the time.

apologies for inundating with the same topic for all my books so far but Ordinary Men is an amazing book chronicling the people that carried out most of the killings during WW2 in Poland, Germany and surrounding areas. The crux of the argument which I have read in many other books is that Auschwitz is a neat little box everyone can picture in their head and assign blame to when in reality most people killed during that time were taken to the outskirts of their town and shot in plain sight by fellow townspeople, mostly retired police officers and soldiers no longer able for active duty.

for some lighter reading i really enjoy jon ronson's books and i've read all of them. standouts are So You've Been Publicly Shamed and The Psychopath Test. Highly recommend Them as well which has an early Alex Jones cameo in it.




u/argleblather · 3 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

Jon Ronson actually has a very interesting book on this subject, with interviews of mental patients, prisoners, and CEO's, comparing and contrasting the traits that might tick them off as sociopaths. The Psychopath Test.

u/nophantasy · 3 pointsr/Libri

I migliori: Il Maestro e Margherita e The Psychopath Test

u/LittleHelperRobot · 3 pointsr/Documentaries

Non-mobile: http://www.amazon.com/dp/1594485755?vs=1

^That's ^why ^I'm ^here, ^I ^don't ^judge ^you. ^PM ^/u/xl0 ^if ^I'm ^causing ^any ^trouble. ^WUT?

u/RichHixson · 3 pointsr/thejinx

I had read Jon Ronson's excellent book "The Psychopath Test" months prior to seeing "The Jinx." Durst would have to score very high on the test.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Psychopath-Test-Journey-Industry/dp/1594485755

u/KingBroseph · 3 pointsr/Psychonaut

Psychopaths (sociopath is not used anymore, clinically) seem to show signs that their amygdala (a center of the brain important to emotional response and thus empathy) is damaged, possibly from birth, meaning that no matter what they do they will never care about other people truly as we wish they could.

LSD has been given to psychopaths and murderers since the 70s as part of psychological research and if I remember correctly it didn't work at all.

Source: Recently read The Wisdom of Psychopaths
and The Psychopath Test

EDIT: Also see this from a few weeks ago Sociopath seeking advice to achieve enlightenment.

u/tikael · 3 pointsr/atheism

>For instance, nobody desires to be a true sociopath (ie: physically and chemically cannot feel good or evil), and those who are true sociopaths... well... many do not function well in society. Like it or not, what God defines as good... really is good

That is not a sociopath. Sociopaths lack empathy, but they may be acutely aware of societal norms. Jon Ronson just wrote a book about socio/psychopaths. I would suggest you read up on the Euthyphro dilemma. We can debate all day about the meaning of "good", but the god in the bible is not it. Condoning rape, commanding genocide, condemning though crime, those are the acts of the god of the bible. Those are not in any way good. If you want to know a little more about modern views of morality you should read up on the evolutionary causes of morality. Sam Harris wrote a very good book about it recently

>How much evil should God get rid of divinely?

Well, none of it according to the bible. Isiah 45:6-7 (Young's literal translation but you can look it up in whichever version you like)

>So that they know from the rising of the sun, And from the west, that there is none besides Me, I [am] Jehovah, and there is none else, Forming light, and preparing darkness, Making peace, and preparing evil, I [am] Jehovah, doing all these things.'

u/eldub · 3 pointsr/business

This is interesting to read in the wake of the release of Jon Ronson's recent book that looks at psychopathic leaders. I think people tend to like having others do their dirty work for them, whether it's their bosses doing high-level dirty work or the cleaners doing low-level dirty work. Rudely aggressive people can be a temptation (not always, of course, but this also seems to fit an intimate relationship stereotype, doesn't it?), as long as you can preserve the hope that they'll point that thing in someone else's direction.

Edit: The reference to cleaners is intended to be in connection with the more literal "dirty work," not rudeness or aggression.

u/BettyMcBitterpants · 3 pointsr/MLPLounge

No, it's not that unusual. But it's not in the average, "HAY GUISE!" category. I do think it is weird, tho--imo, it's more fuck-with-your-mind than just a normal [crazy] dream.

And I don't know what reality-testing you're doing, but it sounds, to me, like you're doing it wrong? I mean, I can't imagine how I would ever be able to materialise a sandwich in front of me in my waking life. Unless you're saying you can't materialise sandwiches in your dreams because of this, I guess--I can see how that would be possible. What about reading written material, then looking away, then re-reading it? Does it stay consistent? That would be highly impressive to the point of nigh-unbelievable [to me personally] if you said you could do that in a dream.

Tbh, if you want to know more about it, you should read some books or even talk to people in /r/LucidDreaming; I'm not an expert. What I can say from my personal observations is that there do seem to be correlations between different personalities and the kinds of dreams people have.

The best example I can come up with off the top of my head that I didn't just make up: Researches have found memory & dreaming are somehow related. I've read it hypothesised that dreaming might be a mechanism which assists in memory storage. Also, psychopaths are known to both have poor memories as well as, for the most part, actually not experience dreams, or have very weak/pale ones. This is highly unusual, as you may already know, since even though many people can't remember their dreams this is not an indication of them not having dreams; everyone dreams, so it is said. However, psychopaths aren't considered to have the most normal personalities, anyway. (Iirc, these tidbits were cherry-picked from The Head Trip & The Psychopath Test.)

So anyway, as a lay person, I make wild personal speculations about how whatever it is that gives rise to personality also gives rise to types of dreams & dream experiences, but it's just for my own amusement & I haven't looked into it deeply enough to make some kind of insightful statement to you about this kind of "uncanny valley of waking consciousness" dream. But I guess usually that kind of thing seems to pop up when one's life is highly routine..? So perhaps trying something new & breaking out of your comfort zone could be in order?

I mean, if you like.

u/celticeric · 3 pointsr/philosophy

A bit off topic, but Jon Ronson's new book The Psychopath Test has a peculiar and amusing tale (but true) in which Douglas Hofstadter is one of the characters. I won't spoil it for anyone who hasn't read it.

u/Rechan · 3 pointsr/horror

No, you're cool - I understand the need to point out factual error.

I would have went into more detail about where I got my information and the specifics about it. I read The Psychopath Test and in it the author meets up with Bob Hare and talks to him about psychopaths, as well as some of Hare's research.

One example (where I was getting the fear response bit) is that two groups in a prison were given electric shocks. The setup was they were shown a countdown to the shock, and saw the level of the shock that was coming. They gave them some Painful shocks. One group, men whose crimes were related to passion or poverty or abuse would gird themselves for the coming pain, they were sweating, they were expressing fear or anxiety of the oncoming pain. Psychopaths did not. They reacted to the pain itself, but they were calm up until that point, and Hare was theorizing that their amygdala was not sending the 'anticipate pain' signal that it should have.

In addition, an example was given that if you are looking at a slide show or a movie and suddenly there's an image of a decapitated body on the screen, most normal people will jolt or at least be alarmed; the psychopath would instead pay more attention and become curious.

BTW, I also have a Masters in Psych, so it's nice to bump into someone in the field, even if I'm not using mine and you're doing something more interesting.

u/margalicious · 3 pointsr/Random_Acts_Of_Amazon

This is such an incredible contest for you to hold.

I am entering, because I've been craving a Kindle for a long time, but I lack the funds :I Kindles seem like a wonderful idea to me, because an electronic book uses far fewer resources than a printed one.

My name is Margy, and I LOOOOVE to read! If I had a Kindle, I'd read "The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat." It's a book I've wanted to read for a long time, but I've just never had the money to grab it at the right time. I love classical literature, and having a Kindle would sure help me build my collection! Most of the older books I have are well-loved (i.e. falling apart), and I don't want to risk reading them again. :/

Again, you're amazing, no matter if you choose me or someone else. You're a doll.

u/Liebo · 2 pointsr/books

I have always found Malcolm Gladwell's books to be immensely entertaining. He can be a bit repetitive in pounding his major theses home and I wouldn't advocate for treating any of his theories as the gospel but he is a gifted storyteller and many of his stories regard psychological research.

The Psychopath Test Fascinating look at psychopaths by one of my favorite journalists. Well researched as has some scientific depth but is certainly geared towards the layman.

The Invisible Gorilla Very readable tour through some of our cognitive flaws and blind spots by two psychologists.

Thinking, Fast and Slow Very comprehensive account of how people make decisions by the father of behavioral economics.

u/aphrodite-walking · 2 pointsr/Random_Acts_Of_Amazon

Hallucinations I've been wanting to read this book for a while, it seems interesting!

u/btribble · 2 pointsr/mildlyinteresting
u/jeffmonger · 2 pointsr/videos

I highly recommend his books, especially The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat. They changed my life.

u/EscapeFromTexas · 2 pointsr/exchristian

Nope.
You should read Hallucinations by Oliver Sacks.
http://www.amazon.com/Hallucinations-Oliver-Sacks/dp/0307947432

u/ruzmutuz · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

Surprisingly there is actually a list!

I'm definitely not qualified to talk about this at all, as i've literally started reading a book which talks quite a lot about identifying psychopaths (same as a sociopath apparently - used interchangeably as i've read), so this is all I know from the last couple of days.

But there is a list called The Hare Psychopathy Checklist, which is made up of 20 different traits, all of which you're scored either 0, 1 or 2 on. So, psychopaths are usually scoring above 30 out of 40. The book i'm reading is really good, if you're interested it's called - quite fittingly - The Psychopath Test

u/Skelliwig · 2 pointsr/Random_Acts_Of_Amazon

The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson is such a good book, it's utterly brilliant!

u/didierdoddsy · 2 pointsr/TheRedLion

Jon Ronson is a journalist and he starts exploring the lives of psychopaths. It's really interesting.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Psychopath-Test-Jon-Ronson/dp/0330492276

u/Qwill2 · 2 pointsr/civ

Gonick also has a History of The U.S., by the way.

Van Lente and Dunlavey's Action Philosophers is also a candidate if you're into the history of philosophy. In fact, while I'm at it, let me recommend the "For beginners" series about different philosophers and philosophic traditions. Examples: Marx, Freud, Existensialism etc. For a preview of the series, check out Philosophy for beginners at Google Books.

Edit: They even have reddit favourite Noam Chomsky for beginners!

u/Condemned-to-exile · 2 pointsr/socialism

Marx For Beginners is the closest thing I can think of that's already out there.

u/stackedmidgets · 2 pointsr/TheRedPill

No, I agree with Thomas Szasz (www.szasz.com) that psychiatric illnesses are metaphors, and that they can't be objectively identified like actual illnesses.

I've read his books. Have you studied him, or the other (non-Scientologist etc.) serious critics of psychiatry? Maybe some of the recent well-reviewed books on the topic?

Like The Book of Woe by Gary Greenberg? [1] Anything by Peter Breggin?

Or are you just going to nip at me like a small cat?

[1]http://www.amazon.com/The-Book-Woe-Unmaking-Psychiatry/dp/0399158537

u/Baeocystin · 2 pointsr/TumblrInAction

True, they are slightly different. I'm willing to bet both will eventually map to defects in the cortical homunculus, though.

IIRC, the patient you're referring to is discussed in The Man who Mistook his Wife for a Hat. A fascinating book that I highly recommend to everyone interested in how the mind works.

u/somewherein72 · 2 pointsr/audiobooks

Not really sure what you're looking for, but check out some of Oliver Saks audiobooks. "The man who mistook his wife for a hat" was excellent for a non-fiction audiobook with a clinical approach that was easily digestible for a laymen.

u/CyborgShakespeare · 2 pointsr/booksuggestions

If you liked Musicophila, I would definitely recommend some of Oliver Sacks' other books, such as The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat, which is collection of case studies about people with unique neurological disorders. Understanding how the brain falls apart gives an entirely new perspective into what's going on when the brain is working.

I also love the book The Most Human Human by Brian Christian. It's a fascinating mix of tech and philosophy and psychology - one of my favorite non-fiction books.

Maybe look into some of Malcolm Gladwell's books too. They're pretty quick reads - entertaining and thought-provoking, very sociology/social psychology based.

u/7PercentSolution · 2 pointsr/slp

My Stroke of Insight by Jill Taylor: A neuroscientist has a stroke and learns to walk, talk, eat, write, or recall her memories.

The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat by Oliver Sacks: Interesting case studies of patients who suffered from extreme/rare neurological disorders.

Far From the Tree by Andrew Solomon: Not necessarily speech-language pathology specific, but it includes chapters identity, self-perception, social perception of people with autism, Down syndrome, and Deaf culture. I read this book recently, and it's absolutely brilliant.

u/mythogen · 2 pointsr/science

If I were to stipulate that the sole impact of alcohol on a brain was the inhibit "higher thinking" and cause one to "rely on more basic instincts", which I am not convinced of, I would still have to question your concept of those "more basic instincts" being somehow more "core" than other behaviors. Why should disabling part of your brain imply that the part that is not disabled is more "true"? Almost any part of a brain can be less active than that same part is in a neurotypical person, which can lead to all sorts of different bizarre behaviors (The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat, anyone?).

To assess a person's behavior under a particular intoxicant as "deep rooted" in comparison to their behavior under non-intoxicated or otherwise intoxicated situations, which is apparently "less real", is purely based on cultural bias.

u/P1h3r1e3d13 · 2 pointsr/askscience

Well, if you can sink as much time into Wikipedia as I can, that's a good start. And don't skip the references and links at the bottom; that's 90% of the fun!

There are a lot of good, popular-audience books on these topics. I don't know any about BCI in particular, but check out The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat (and other stuff by Oliver Sacks) and Phantoms in the Brain. Those are the ones we read in COGS 1 and they're great. Right now I'm reading Jonah Lehrer's Proust Was a Neuroscientist; How We Decide was also good. Also, don't shy away from academic literature. It's not really so hard to read if you're interested.

Are you or could you be in college? Check my advice here. If you at least live near a college, sit in on some classes. Write to a professor and see if there's lab work to do, maybe as a volunteer. That could get your foot in the door.

u/azirafale · 2 pointsr/psychology

You may find this book right up your alley then: http://www.amazon.com/Man-Who-Mistook-His-Wife/dp/0684853949

u/ididnoteatyourcat · 2 pointsr/AskScienceDiscussion

The psychological reasons why people believe this kind of stuff are pretty easy to explain. For example see my post in this thread about confirmation bias and the look-elsewhere effect. It also might be worth mentioning that human perception is a bit of a mess; experimenting with psychedelics can be helpful in getting a sense of this, or maybe reading some Oliver Sacks. Basically there is pretty good scientific evidence that you can't always trust what you think you see. Finally, you do have a good question in there that I think is worth taking seriously: "why not?" Besides philosophical issues with mind-body dualism, I'd respond "Because there is simply no scientific evidence for it whatsoever." If there were a separate world of ghosts that could interact with our world, they would presumably be detectable through any of many extremely sensitive scientific experiments.

u/zuluthrone · 2 pointsr/pics
u/forseti99 · 2 pointsr/suggestmeabook

Given his interest in science and that he's got a reather short attention span I'd go for The man who mistook his wife for a hat. They are short stories about individuals whose brains are just not working right.

u/fiver_ · 2 pointsr/todayilearned

Fancy word is Prosopagnosia. If you're interested, you'll like the collection of short medical tales by Oliver Sachs called The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat (Amazon link).

u/hwilsonia · 2 pointsr/booksuggestions

Oliver Sacks' exploration of mental illness has an existential bent to it that I've always appreciated. His book, "The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat" is fascinating and touches on how simple faculties of the mind make up our consciousness, our existence. One of his patients literally cannot distinguish his wife from his hat (the title story), and Sacks discusses how this inability shapes his patient's understanding of himself and the world.

Years later and I'm still geeking out about it.

https://smile.amazon.com/Man-Who-Mistook-His-Wife/dp/0684853949/ref=sr_1_1?crid=M7R0DJM18914&keywords=the+man+who+mistook+his+wife+for+a+hat&qid=1573405204&sprefix=the+man+who+mist%2Caps%2C226&sr=8-1

u/Adderley · 2 pointsr/psychology

On Becoming a Person

  • Classic book about psychotherapy from a giant in the field and written for the layperson. Really, anything by Rogers is good.

    The Man who Mistook his Wife for a Hat

  • you can probably argue that this collection of case studies is more neurology than psychology, but I think it overlaps and is a very interesting read.
u/freakscene · 2 pointsr/IAmA

I second the reading idea! Ask your history or science teachers for suggestions of accessible books. I'm going to list some that I found interesting or want to read, and add more as I think of them.

A short history of nearly everything by Bill Bryson. Title explains it all. It is very beginner friendly, and has some very entertaining stories. Bryson is very heavy on the history and it's rather long but you should definitely make every effort to finish it.

Lies my teacher told me

The greatest stories never told (This is a whole series, there are books on Presidents, science, and war as well).

There's a series by Edward Rutherfurd that tells history stories that are loosely based on fact. There are books on London and ancient England, Ireland, Russia, and one on New York

I read this book a while ago and loved it- Autobiography of a Tibetan Monk It's about a monk who was imprisoned for 30 years by the Chinese.

The Grapes of Wrath.

Les Misérables. I linked to the unabridged one on purpose. It's SO WORTH IT. One of my favorite books of all time, and there's a lot of French history in it. It's also the first book that made me bawl at the end.

You'll also want the Adventures of Tom Sawyer, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Great Gatsby, The Federalist Papers.

I'm not sure what you have covered in history, but you'll definitely want to find stuff on all the major wars, slavery, the Bubonic Plague, the French Revolution, & ancient Greek and Roman history.

As for science, find these two if you have any interest in how the brain works (and they're pretty approachable).
Phantoms in the brain
The man who mistook his wife for a hat

Alex and Me The story of a scientist and the incredibly intelligent parrot she studied.

For a background in evolution, you could go with The ancestor's tale

A biography of Marie Curie

The Wild Trees by Richard Preston is a quick and easy read, and very heavy on the adventure. You'll also want to read his other book The Hot Zone about Ebola. Absolutely fascinating, I couldn't put this one down.

The Devil's Teeth About sharks and the scientists who study them. What's not to like?

u/apmihal · 2 pointsr/IAmA

In the mean time you can read the book The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat and Other Clinical Tales by Oliver Sacks He talks about a lot of very interesting case studies and several of them have to do with people who have a severed corpus callosum.

Also on his wikipedia page there is a picture of him wearing a shirt that says "WELCOME SQUID OVERLORDS" so you know he's good.

u/Ish71189 · 2 pointsr/AskScienceDiscussion

Two things, (1) I'm going to recommend mostly books and not textbooks, since you're going to read plenty of those in the future. And (2) I'm going to only focus on the area of cognitive psychology & neuroscience. With that being said:

Beginner:

The Man Who Mistook His Wife for A Hat: And Other Clinical Tales By Oliver Sacks

Brain Bugs: How the Brain's Flaws Shape Our Lives By Dean Buonomano

Kludge: The Haphazard Evolution of the Mind By Gary Marcus

The Trouble with Testosterone: And Other Essays on the Biology of the Human Predicament By Robert M. Sapolsky

The Seven Sins of Memory: How the Mind Forgets and Remembers By Daniel L. Schacter

Intermediate: (I'm going to throw this in here, because reading the beginner texts will not allow you to really follow the advanced texts.)

Cognitive Neuroscience: The Biology of the Mind By Michael S. Gazzaniga, Richard B. Ivry & George R. Mangun

Advanced:

The Prefrontal Cortex By Joaquin Fuster

The Dream Drugstore: Chemically Altered States of Consciousness By J. Allan Hobson

The Oxford Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning By Keith J. Holyoak & Robert G. Morrison

u/usernametaken8 · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

Everything you will ever experience happens in your brain. Books by Oliver Sacks and V.S. Ramachandran are entertaining without being totally overrun by misrepresentations of science.

u/mgr86 · 2 pointsr/news

may I reccomend The Secret Chief

>This book is about a psychologist, "Jacob" (pseudonym), who applied psychedelic drugs throughout his practice of psychotherapy until his death twenty or so ago-in spite of the fact that such drugs had been declared illegal in the mid-60's. The body of the book is an interview with Jacob conducted in the early 80s but never before published; this is followed by an appendix paraphrasing the drug experiences of five of his clients, and an appendix listing resources for those interested in psychedelic therapy. The drugs favored by Jacob: LSD (he always started a series with LSD), sacred mushrooms (Psilocybe cubensis), mescaline, MDA, MDMA ("Ecstasy"), harmaline (yage') and ibogaine. Each has a somewhat different effect. In successive chapters, Jacob discusses the preparation for a psychedelic session, the setting, the session itself, the dosages, and outcomes.

u/wccrowley · 2 pointsr/occult

I'm not sure what to think about some of these replies.

​

This book by Lon Milo Duquette has, by far, the most honest and insightful stories of evocation I've found. It's written by someone with a perfect combination of magickal experience and writing experience.

He discusses the physical appearances and behaviors of demons he has personally evoked using proper ceremony from the Lesser Keys of Solomon, but most importantly, he describes the bizarre ramifications of those ceremonies. You are left to come to your own conclusions about the risks and rewards of opening a dialogue with demons. His stories are a total trip.

​

As for my own experiences:

I've been studying and to a lesser extent practicing magick for 27 years, and I still do not feel comfortable attempting to opening up this box because it is not for the curious amateur. It is playing with powerful forces that are known for being very difficult to control.

I believe I have had intense interactions with entities, mainly in my teen years, but I don't have any way of connecting those experiences to a particular demon or other spirit.

It sounds like some of the others that have responded have also. Were they "demons"? Well, I think it's helpful for communication to agree on definitions, otherwise there isn't an actual conversation happening:

I would define demons the same as the Goetia defines them. That is my reference point. Others might think of Djinn, or connect them to Satan, or even the demonic pantheons of indigenous shamanic religions throughout Asia upon which Buddhism has been overlaid. Or comic books and horror movies.

​

My advice to any one on this forum that is having accidental interactions with spirits is to remember to BANISH AFTER EVERY RITUAL. If you have ever read an actual book on magick, you know it emphasizes banishing rituals. How many people end up slightly haunted/unhinged/off-balanced FOR YEARS because they neglected to properly perform banishing component of a ritual?

Banish thoroughly.

u/marginaleye · 2 pointsr/occult

Proceed with caution. DuQuette relates a case of an imaginary friend gone horribly, horribly bad in his autobiographical book, "My Life With the Spirits" (put it this way -- the story ends with an exorcism).

u/Mr_Fffish · 2 pointsr/AskReddit
u/lolmanzorz · 2 pointsr/TrueReddit

Anyone who's interested in this should undoubtedly check out the book Gang Leader for a Day. Absolutely fantastic, captivating read.

u/Duke_Newcombe · 2 pointsr/funny

Sudhir Venkatesh, perhaps?

His book is very interesting--he's mentioned repeatedly in both "Freakonomics" books as well. Suhir, as well as Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner (authors of Freakonomics and Super Freakonomics) are the reasons Behavioral Economics is kind of a "hobby" of mine.

u/grendelt · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

...and that part about prostitution was taken from Gang Leader for a Day by Sudhir Venkatesh

u/Anen-o-me · 2 pointsr/Anarcho_Capitalism

> That's the whole point of ethics, its normative

If it's normative, then people are choosing an ethical ideal. That means it's no longer an objective ethic, but a normative ethic, a voluntary ethic. If you want to say it empirically results in the most X for society if you build a society on this ethical norm, then I will certainly agree. Rand's 30 second explanation of objectivisim standing on one foot would be a good explanation of the values chosen by her.

If we look at the world political system, people generally have chosen as their highest political ideal either equality, security, or liberty--and this forms the three major schools of political thought in the US.

From that stems the political and economic conclusions of each camp.

How can you change someone's highest political ideal? Unless you can do this, you cannot change their mind.

> I cant force you to be ethical if you choose to violate someone else's right to life then you can certainly do that. All I can do is say that something is good or bad based on some standard, in this case the individual's life.

Yes, exactly.

We can then go further and apply values-free suitability analysis which was Von Mises's technique throughout his life. We can ask, will X policy get you to Y result, why or why not.

This, I think, is where valuable political discourse begins.

>
>
>
> The same problem can be found in the NAP, I as a murderer couldn't give two shits about your NAP but its the cornerstone of AnCap ethics, it doesn't mean that since I break the rule that the whole principle is useless.

Sure, but we don't say the NAP is an objective ethic that therefore veryone must be made to follow, that is, we are not statists, but Rand was a statist, Rand wanted to force a political system on an entire population drawn from her own political conclusions.

We say rather that the NAP is an ethical stance and we only want to associate with others willing to live and contract within its bounds.

>
>
>
> If a murderer truly valued his own life he wouldn't murder, how long until he comes upon someone who kills him in self defense, or throws him in jail? Valuing ones life is not immediate its life long and long ranging.
>
>
>
> Idk if you are familiar with calculus or not but its kind of like the derivative vs the integral, the derivative is instantaneous, the integral is the summation of the whole function. That's how I think about it, valuing ones life is looking at the whole not just an instant in time or the future moment.

Others are simply high time-preference, where they want things now, now, now, including perhaps the emotional jolt of killing someone for whatever reason.

We assume the murderer cares about his life 10-20 years from now, or even tomorrow, thus the prospect of life in prison should curb actions that will get you jailed for life. But many sociopaths have a physical inability to care about future consequences.

There's a famous test where they literally put sociopaths in a chair, record their vitals, and hooked up their hand to a shocking wire. Then they told them what would happen, counted down to 10 and gave them a decent shock, something really painful.

They would invariably express pain, like any normal person. But here's where it gets interesting.

In a normal person, as the second count-down proceeded to ten and the shock approached, a normal person would begin to cringe because they knew the pain was coming. But sociopaths did not have this response. Their response was the same as the first time they had not been shocked, they calmly waited without their vitals changing, no heart-beat elevation, no nervous response, no muscular cringe, etc. Even though they knew the pain was coming now, they were unable to fear what was about to come again.

This suggests that a sociopath does not learn from punishment, and thus has no fear of future sanctions against their behavior now.

This is recorded in a book called "The Psycopath Test".

One chilling story he gives is of a psychopath who had been violent, I think killed someone, then was let out on a pass into the yard years later and immediately killed someone, and when asked why he simply said he wanted to see what killing someone felt like again :\ something like that.

Anyway, I'm off topic here so I'll quit.

u/meglet · 2 pointsr/quityourbullshit

That sounds a lot like the guy Jon Ronson interviews in his book The Psychopath Test but he used a pseudonym. Was it in the UK?

u/Hart_Attack · 2 pointsr/TagProIRL

Check out Jon Ronson! I've only read two of his books, The Psychopath Test and Lost at Sea, but they were both really good.

Here are a couple daily show interviews about the books if you want to get a feel for them. They're super entertaining. He's also had a couple segments on This American Life about similar subject matter.

On a different note, Salt is also way more interesting than it has any right to be.

There are others but oh god I really need to be studying for my exams.

u/4x4prints · 2 pointsr/serialpodcast

While I agree with this, they are very seldom sucessfull at maintaining relationships. Check out The Psychopath Test. They "collect" people around them in order to use them for some purpose. Eventually someone figures out they are being used and they reject the Psychopath. Adnan really comes off as just a genuinely nice guy; otherwise he would probably instinctively try to use Sarah as a way to get a new appeal, but he does not give this impression at all.

u/JoshuaZ1 · 2 pointsr/politics

I'm not sure that this is a very productive or useful response, and you seem to be being unnecessarily emotional about this. It is particularly unhelpful to tell people "do your real homework" rather than providing sources.

> Remember that banking reforn bill she campaign on then killed once she got elected?

I'm actually not sure what you are talking about here. It sounds to me like you are talking about a garbled version of the bankruptcy reform which she opposed in 1999 and then favored once she was in the Senate. See e.g. here. In this case, this isn't particularly surprising, nor should it be: New York has many credit card companies and related businesses and she was a Senator from there. Representing constituent interests is a natural thing.

> Remember how after the collapse she told the bankers and walk street guys to "cut it out" while granting them immunity from any crime?

This is a gross oversimplification of a complicated legal situation.

> Remember the times as SoS she helped overthrow whole governments because they were creating a gold backed currency in Africa?

This is again garbled and confused. It is true that the Clinton emails revealed that a specific country, France was concerned about the impact a gold-backed currency would have on the franc. The primary mention of this is in one of the Blumenthal emails, detailing this as one of a variety of French motivations for supporting the intervention. So no, she didn't help overthrow any government because of this.

> She's a lefty on social programs ONLY.

Uhuh. That's why for example she has an 82% from the League of Conservation Voters, which is higher than most Democrats.

The only way I can parse your sentence mean that she's a "warhawk" on foreign policy and that under your terminology every other issue is "social." I'm not completely sure what warhawk means, but it seems that much of the left uses it to mean anyone who ever favored any military intervention that the speaker personally did not. In which case, sure she's a warhawk. But it may be helpful to ask if when labeling her as such, you are actually saying anything at all useful about reality. For example, most people when using the term "warhawk" mean people like Lindsey Graham and John "bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" McCain, or for that matter, Donald Trump. When you use large categories like "warhawk" and lump a very diverse group together you end up losing any trace of nuance.

> sociopath

This sounds more like a boo light, the negative version of an applause light rather than a substantive statement. I recommend reading Ronson's "The Psychopath Test" about sociopathy and psychopathy

> Will say anything to get elected, once elected, will not give one shit about the platform they ran on.

Again, you haven't responded to the fact that empirically her voting record is left of most senators and nearly identical to Bernie's. I pointed you to this Five Thirty Eight analysis which you never responded to. If you'd like to respond to the actual data about the details of her record it might be helpful. But it makes it very difficult to make any claim that that's all she cares about.

Look, I'm not a fan of Hillary far from it. And she's clearly made selfish decisions and has a lot of ambition. But you are apparently confusing that and thinking that she's somehow the worst thing ever which just isn't accurate or born out by her actual statements or senate record. Nuance is important, and it is normally the American right which has trouble understanding nuance and degrees of difference. Don't be that way.

u/storytimeagain · 2 pointsr/tipofmytongue

Sounds like The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson. A man who claims that he faked being crazy is sent to an asylum and says he can't get out because everything you would do to convince them he was not crazy simply makes him sound crazier.

u/Terra_Nullus · 2 pointsr/fullmoviesonyoutube

You are talking about psychopaths - and yes, its an excellent book, based on many studies, the book deals with CEO's specifically.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Psychopath-Test-Journey-Industry/dp/1594485755

However, my pedantry aside, you make a fine point - it is indeed not about journalism at all, rather it is about his mental problems.


Pretty concerning that people are missing the entire thread of the movie and considering it a comment on cut throat journalism and not the portrait of a psychotic.

u/chris769 · 2 pointsr/todayilearned

The Psychopath Test: A Journey Through the Madness Industry https://www.amazon.com/dp/1594485755/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_WKVNzb1NVN5S7

u/cs2818 · 2 pointsr/psychology

His book The Psychopath Test was an interesting read. I've tried applying the Hare Psychopath Checklist in everyday life, the results are a bit scary!

u/accostedbyhippies · 2 pointsr/television

No, that's not how psychopathy works. Not every murderer is a psychopath, hell, most psychopaths aren't even murderers.

Psychopathy is very specific disorder with histories and observable traits. Here's a good book on the subject if you're interested or at least checkout the wikipedia page.

Walt isn't a Psychopath at the beginning of the series, and he just suddenly didn't become one.

u/waitfornightfall · 2 pointsr/books

Off the top of my head:

The Psychopath Test is a wittily written personal study of detecting, treating and (possibly) rehabilitating psychopaths.

The Freakonomics books are written by both an economist and a journalist (so easy to read) and contain slightly left-of-centre economic theories with easy to follow research. These are excellent.

The Omnivores Dilemma is both engaging and though provoking. It's All about the production of food in the modern age. In particular, four different meals.

The Code Book is one of my all-time favourites. As the title suggests it's about all forms of cryptography. If you have a mathematical bent I also like Singh's book about Fermat's Enigma).

u/hipsterparalegal · 2 pointsr/books
u/frijolito · 2 pointsr/WTF

>Item 6. Lack of Remorse or Guilt: A lack of feelings or concern for the losses, pain, and suffering of victims; a tendency to be unconcerned, dispassionate, coldhearted, and unempathic. This item is usually demonstrated by a disdain for one's victims.

Man, reading this I was reminded constantly of "The Psychopath Test". Seriously, read that book. You don't even have to buy it, your local library will have it handy. Download it if you must, I don't care. Everyone should read that book.

u/EncasedMeats · 2 pointsr/bestof

Probably not but Jon Ronson's The Psychopath Test is funny as hell.

u/woodycanuck · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

http://www.amazon.com/Psychopath-Test-Journey-Through-Industry/dp/1594488010/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1313985944&sr=8-1

Not making fun, it's more common than people think. FYI, lots of CEO's are psychopaths.

u/comfyred · 2 pointsr/worldnews
u/anschauung · 2 pointsr/NoStupidQuestions

It might be really risky.

There's a famous story that's summarized in The Psychopath Test where a person faked mental illness:

> Tony said the day he arrived at the dangerous and severe personality disorder (DSPD) unit, he took one look at the place and realised he’d made a spectacularly bad decision. He asked to speak urgently to psychiatrists. “I’m not mentally ill,” he told them.

Unfortunately no one believed him. The psychiatrists eventually concluded that only a psychopath would fake being a psychopath, and the dude was stuck there for years.

Probably not worth the risk.

u/asnof · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

I read a book on socio paths/psychopaths(The Psychopath test). So I can recognise the behaviour before its too late. They are the best at faking emotions while not actually having any. I recommend it due to the fact it has enabled me to read people better.

u/jacenat · 1 pointr/pics

> I thought I was the only one who couldn't talk.

You should really read (or listen to the audio book of) "Halucinations" by oliver sacks.

http://www.amazon.com/Hallucinations-Oliver-Sacks/dp/0307947432

It might not help you, but it can give you a new view on what's happening to you during a migrane attack. You can even prime friends/relatives on what to do/expect during a strong attack when you can't tell them then and there.

u/fatty2cent · 1 pointr/RationalPsychonaut

I picked up a used copy of Rational Mysticism at Half priced books but haven't started to read it yet. It might be down your ally. Hallucinations by Oliver Sacks and the Psychedelic Explorers Guide by James Fadiman may also be what you are looking for

u/kommandeclean · 1 pointr/mildlyinteresting

Oliver Sacks has this book where these kind of patterns are mentioned. They are hallucinations nothing more.

u/Siglin · 1 pointr/MindHunter

My ex was a narcissist (and probably a psychopath) and he got loads of panic attacks. Usually when he lost control of a situation or me not doing what he thought I should. A lot of people high up in the business world are psychopaths, this book is good The Psychopath Test
This is description of psychopaths from perspective of abusive relationships but it gives you an idea of how common it is even if they're not all killers.

u/FrznFury · 1 pointr/socialism

No, I'm objecting to the fact that we assign the greatest currency value to the labor of those who produce the least use-value.

As for the rest, I'll tell you exactly why it matters.

Take all the imaginary currency out of the equation. Does your CEO have a useful skill that can be applied to the (actual, not financial) benefit of mankind? No? What the fuck is he being paid for, then?

A steamfitter makes a difference in the world, as does a cook, a nurse, a midwife, and a biomedical engineer. All of these people, if financial instruments were to simply cease to exist, have value and add value to the world with their labor.

That is use-value. When your labor actually serves some kind of purpose other than pissing about with money, then you create use-value.

Might I suggest an excellent book, if you would like some real understanding of the topic?

u/Denny_Craine · 1 pointr/socialism

there's actually a very good (and short) comic out there called Marx for Beginners which is a real basic intro to the philosophical and historical origins of Marxism (describing Hegel, and the basic ideas of historical materialism, going into how it shaped Marx's ideas on socialism), I'd recommend it highly for anyone whose just getting into socialist theory.

u/StandupPhilosopher · 1 pointr/socialism

Yeah, it's only about ~40 pages if you don't include the prefaces. It's "basic" because its a fundamental text of Marxist theory, but its not written in "plain language". I'd recommend Marx for Beginners by Ruis. It's in cartoon format, but don't underestimate it. It gives you a good overview of Marx's philosophic, economic, and revolutionary aspects (which are paramount for a good understanding of socialism), and it's pretty readable.

Also, check out socialism on Wikipedia. You can even have Wikipedia compile a Socialism "book" for you, which is just a collection of all the different Wikipedia articles on socialism delivered to you as a PDF or other file format so you can read it on your iPhone, Kindle, print it or whatever.

u/Adahn5 · 1 pointr/socialism

There's also Rius' Marx for Beginners It's cute and non-confrontational, it's also relatively simple to understand to the uninitiated, and of course it's funny as heck x3

You could also get them some Smurfs comic books xD

u/thereminist · 1 pointr/occult

Thank you for your well-wishes. I have been practicing vipassana and attending retreats for about eight years now, and only this most recent retreat had the most intense "mystical" experiences, most of which I discarded as sensation, sound, etc. I felt safe the entire time as my sangha is extremely supportive, compassionate and kind, and they have an openeness toward mental health issues that other sanghas might not (they also have a big recovery community -- in fact most people are former punks now in recovery from their addictions). I'm well aware of the dangers of vipassana retreats for people like me, however a bunch of the teachers know me by now and are also aware of my condition. I even got to talk to Noah Levine, the founder of the community, about my psychosis, and he was really chill. It takes a loving, warm compassionate environment to safely navigate these experiences.

As it comes to "social justice to the P-doc's office" it's not quite so simple as that. I've had wonderful relationships with psychiatrists and general prescribers who were willing to understand and listen. I have not and have never been diagnosed with schizophrenia. It's always been a tossup between Bipolar and Major Depression with psychotic symptoms (psychotic depression).

My first major episode was induced by a medication for bipolar, when I was fifteen and thought I only had depression. I fought with my parents when I became a teen, became very anti-authority, had insomnia, internet addiction and depression directly post-9/11 and my parents thought my rebellion against them (somewhat traditional people) was unusual. They told my first psychiatrist of my behaviors and without really speaking to me the psychiatrist decided I had bipolar and gave me depakote. That's my major beef with psychiatrists and trying to tell them that my first episode was induced by medication. When I got out of that first hospitalization, I was given the diagnosis "Major Depression with psychotic symptoms." however I have to deal with a broken system that makes you change your psychiatrist constantly based on insurance, etc. They're damned ready to tell me "it was going to happen anyway," and give me more bipolar meds, or deny that it's MD with PS. I feel no. No, had I not been inaccurately prescribed an epilepsy medication which was pushed by pharmaceuticals during the 2003 era of bipolar popularity (see the book "Book of Woe: the DSM and the Unmaking of Psychiatry"), then I would never have had psychosis, and I would not be writing these posts. My feeling of being "victimized" is much less so than it was then, because I am empowered by my story which I have shared with many and I have made many connections in the mental health community, as well as in mindfulness-based mental health. I've already gotten future career opportunities offered to me for when I finally graduate. I see Eleanor Longden (see her TED talk) as a source of inspiration that I too can help be a part of a movement which is growing to redefine psychosis, (see websites like Mad in America) in a more compassionate way. I have a professor who told me the language of psychosis is currently shifting. I believe I can be a part of this.

tl;dr I have been doing vipassana long enough and never had a break while on retreat or a result of a retreat, and I am a part of a very loving and compassionate recovery-based sangha. My "social justice" regarding psychiatry isn't quite so simple; I'm aware of the pitfalls of trying to change a system, of course I was being hyperbolic when I said I want to "change" things. sorry, I am notoriously long-winded and verbose

edit: a few words and links

u/tttt0tttt · 1 pointr/books

Start with his autobiography. It's easy reading, and is a fascinating insight into the man. A great jumping off place to get into his works.

u/Seriphosify · 1 pointr/Jung
u/AgrippaTheGreen · 1 pointr/introvert

Carl Jung was considered an introvert and wrote an autobiography. He also coined the terms introversion and extroversion. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0679723951/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

u/orderedchaos · 1 pointr/INTP

Yes I have a copy of that book right now in my bag!

Thinking in pictures

This book helped me with communication a lot. I realised that when i try explain a idea I have in my head I get pictures that go with the words.
Other people dont have the pictures which is why people dont always understand me.

Since I read it I have started explaining things in a more visual way which has improved clarity.

It also made me think that to be INTP is to have at the very least some aspergic tendencies.




u/concise_dictionary · 1 pointr/askphilosophy

> Like, the idea of "things" is too imperfect of a model of reality to try and do things like reliably say "this is a ship" or "this is a whale.

Do you have any evidence to back this up? Because you seem to be saying that we can't reliably recognize and name things and that's just completely false. In fact, when people start having trouble reliably recognizing and naming things, neurologists like Oliver Sachs write books about them because it is so unusual. The book, The Man who Mistook His Wife for a Hat is an amazing book anyway; you should check it out sometime.

The fact that there are edge cases sometimes that are harder to classify and name doesn't change the basic facts.

u/Terrificchu · 1 pointr/neuroscience

I second Oliver Sacks - Hallucinations or this oliver sacks book. Also "Tale of Dueling Neurosurgeons" is good and provides a more general overview

u/recycled_thoughts · 1 pointr/LSD

> So what do you feel and experience when you took the 150ug?

  • "stoned" feeling in my head

  • classic LSD visual distortions: warping of shapes and textures, some pink/purple tinting of colors, some (subtle) tracers

  • the main thing was that music was richer. the analogy I made to my wife was the difference was between looking at a pool and swimming in the pool. rather than experiencing the music from a distance, I felt immersed in it. I also had enhanced coctail party effect -- I could appreciate the music as a whole, but I could also focus on one instrument or one voice in the mix and it would just stand out clearly from all the other components in the mix. Listening to the Beatles "A Day In The Life" with headphones and my eyes closed was a profound experience.

  • something happened at 150ug that didn't happen at 100ug and that was that my sense of taste was entirely thrown off. I had a good quality salt + toffee milk chocolate bar to snack on. At lower doses, the flavor seemed enhanced. At 150, it was terrible -- it tasted like paste. I'm not sure if it was due to the higher dose, or that normally I eat lightly before the trip, but on that particular day I had had a hearty lunch just before starting.

    As for 400-600 ug -- I don't know if I'll ever get that heavy. I'll keep doing 50 ug increments until either I find what I'm looking for, or it gets too unpleasant, or it puts too much burden on my wife. If I never did LSD again I would be OK with that too.

    Getting back to spirituality, one of my favorite books ever is "The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat" by Oliver Sacks. It contains a number of cases of people who had brain malfunctions (injury, stroke, horribly allergic reaction), and those malfunctions also shed a lot of light on how "normal" brains operate. It led me to believe that our consciousness and personalities are actually thin veneers and are far more brittle than we suspect. Other reading has led me to believe that a lot of what we think we "know" as fact is actually highly suspect. Dabbling with LSD has only reinforced these beliefs. While there is no doubt that people have profound experiences while taking it, I believe that the truth it reveals isn't some hidden truth of the universe but rather a truth about how our brains use heuristics and extrapolation to try and make sense of the world.
u/5grumblepies · 1 pointr/psychology

So many! Dissociative Identity disorder (more commonly know as Multiple Personality Disorder); Psychopathy (especially because we know so little about it.) ; Phantom limbs ; Capgras syndrom ( delusion that a close friend or family member has been replaced by aliens) ; Hyprocondriasis; Narcolepsy; sleep paralysis; Dissociative Fugue ; The case of H.M. (a very well known case study on memory loss. He was a man who suffered retrograde amnesia, but whose working memory was still intact. taught us a lot about different types of memory and their corresponding brain redgions...

There are plenty of others that I cannot think of off the top of my head. But if you are looking for some interesting cases, here are two great books about really strange and interesting psychological phenomenons are "The Man Who Mistook His for a Hat and Other Clinical Tales" by Oliver Sacks , and " Phantoms in the Brain" by V. S. Ramachandran and Sandra Blakeslee

The first one includes several cases of patients with inexplicably strange neurological disorders. For example, a man who is no longer able to recognize people and common objects. There is an other story about a man who sometimes wakes suddenly at night, thoroughly convinced that his leg is actually a corpse's leg that somebody has placed in bed with him.

The second book was the text book for my cognitive psych class in second year. Like the first book contains many stories of fantastically strange cases that the author has encountered as a neuroscientist. This book contains more of the psychological and neurological basis for the disorders, and shows how they helped us understand different aspects of behaviour and structures of the brain.

u/electricfistula · 1 pointr/AskReddit

You could try reading this book as a general investigations of neurological disorder (including Tourette's). I don't think this is the place for medical advice though. Contact a neurologist or inform your doctor that the medicine you are currently taking is insufficient and ask if there is another treatment that might be more successful for you.

u/kukkuzejt · 1 pointr/tipofmytongue

He must be this guy.

u/mushpuppy · 1 pointr/offbeat

Should go in a cardiological version of this book.

u/mezzer_real · 1 pointr/reddit.com

This book is well worth picking up if you find this video interesting, very, very interesting:

The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat: And Other Clinical Tales
by Oliver Sacks

u/curlicarly · 1 pointr/Random_Acts_Of_Amazon

Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn is really great. DFTBA :)

This would be great!

I love reading books!

u/BeautyintheDissonanc · 1 pointr/Psychonaut

Read this

u/Capercaillie · 1 pointr/evolution

I'd suggest the people in this thread read The Unpersuadables by Will Storr. The author talks to a number of well-meaning, smart people who believe in all kinds of crazy ideas--UFOs, holocaust denial, homeopathy, and yes, creationism. It's really easy to make fun of people who believe stuff that's obviously not true (I know, because I do it all the time), but it might be better to try to understand them, the way that Storr does in his book. He also talks to some neurologists and psychologists who agree with the ideas presented in the OP--that we come to our beliefs (whatever they are), and if we're really smart, we can perform all kinds of mental backflips to rationalize them. Maybe you and I are smart enough that we figured out that evolution is true--or maybe we're just lucky that our upbringing and education placed us on the right side to begin with.

Before we get too cocky, it's best to remember that the odds are seriously stacked against the possibility that any of us is absolutely right about everything we believe.

u/Eileen_Palglace · 1 pointr/betterCallSaul

We just did. And now...? Cricket noises.

Listen, absolutely nothing is going to convince you this is real at this point. You've obviously got some kind of weird investment in your conspiracy theory. So I'm not here to change your mind. I'm here to watch a fascinating case study in Unpersuadables.

u/yellowstuff · 1 pointr/Economics

I have no research experience whatsoever, but 2 things spring to mind.

Do like Dunkin Donuts does to its franchise owners, and spy on them, looking for new cars, large homes, and other signs of consumption.

Or do what Sudhir Venkatesh describes in Gang Leader For A Day and get people to trust you, then ask them for economic data about their illicit activities. If corruption is widespread and relatively acceptable you might be able to get people to tell you dollar amounts at least in general terms.

u/mattymillhouse · 1 pointr/suggestmeabook

The Psychopath Test, by Jon Ronson

u/moltenglacier · 1 pointr/HPMOR

If you want a good book that explores sociopathy, try the psychopath test.

Another way is a sort of riff off EY's "Minds are made of parts." After creating a decently complex character, imagine that all the people who get in his way are just simple programs and ask yourself: how he would respond to those few lines of code? After all, code has no feelings...

u/sprunkiely · 1 pointr/offmychest

Have you read "the psychopath test"? It may help you to understand people a bit more. Not being mean. Just look into it.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Psychopath-Test-Journey-Industry/dp/1594485755

u/bluepillcuck · 1 pointr/MorbidReality

I strongly urge you to read this book and to be more skeptical of medical "science."

https://www.amazon.com/Psychopath-Test-Journey-Through-Industry/dp/1594485755

u/Look_At_That_OMGWTF · 1 pointr/todayilearned

There's a book called The Psychopath Test that talks about this, it really makes you ask, how can you prove your sanity?

u/geeteee · 1 pointr/oculus

Maybe this has been in your recent reading? If not, it should be as an enjoyable journey into some related topics. :-)

u/EtchyTWA · 1 pointr/IAmA

Not read this anywhere else - but Jon Ronson wrote "The Psychopath test" -

http://www.amazon.com/The-Psychopath-Test-Journey-Industry/dp/1594485755

Does this help?

u/winnie_the_slayer · 1 pointr/JordanPeterson

Perhaps "the immoral conscience kills experience." It sounds like this kind of situation isn't suited to a conversation on the interwebs, and it wouldn't be right of me to speculate without talking to you in person to learn more. Assuming that what you are describing is something like "psychopathy" in the psychoanalytic sense (not the hollywood portrayal), you might like this book or this book. There are other books about it out there, Robert Hare is one of the more well known researchers on the topic and is mentioned in Ronson's book.

u/wera34 · 1 pointr/MensRights

>an example of Haruhi being tsundere. Kyon falls asleep and wakes to find Haruhi waiting for him to wake up. (She has even been watching him as he slept.) She has covered his back with her cardigan. Her actions are kind and affectionate, but she won't admit to it in words. The viewer though, sees it. it's this contrast that makes a tsundere endearing.


..yeah I don't know why I remembered this scene completely differently. I literally remembered kyon giving haruhi "his" jacket. Okay that was an interesting experiment on flase memories. Even so season 1 is 240minutes long and you can literally find only one minute of haruhi acting like a normal person.


>Often Japanese stories in manga are about coming of age, beginnings, initial romantic tensions, etc. The story is about the journey, not the destination. A lot of Western readers get frustrated that relationships don't progress more quickly, while the manga author is actually trying to keep the focus on the slow development of the relationship.


No. That doesn't explain the popularity of tsundere. First off I think we relate a lot more to fucked up characters then even we ourselves realize. So the so-called "nomal" characters we see on tv and movies don't relate to us that well. We are inavertainly drawn to fucked up characters. We have a darkness inside all of us For example imaginary zenpacki chastises ichigo for being to hesitant to attack,that he holds back his power because he's too kind and afraid . This restraint of power is why hollow ichigo will always be stronger. When ichigo becomes vizard ichigo he is accepting the dark side in him and thats why he's twice as strong. That's why everyone has gone crazy over the new jessica jones show. She's the first character on live tv who exactly represents most of us. We look up to jessica jones, and hollow ichigo because rather then completely shun their dark side, they try to channel their dark side and put it to good use.


So going back to our discussion at lot of the behaviors of tsundere women are to certain extent relatable. With the haruhi example there was this one scene where she talks about how there are thousands of classrooms just like the one she's in and nobody is unique or special. That she's not unique or special.Which can lead to a dark place. I mean it's pretty normal to think about suicide however even in the real world if you mention to your close friends that you think life is meaningless there's a good chance they'll call you a weirdo. She seems be unable to delude herself like most people seem to do and think that they are somhow a unique snowflake. So she act's out. That to a large extent is perfectly understandable

Another good example is Homura Akemi. She started off as an immature but relatably nerdy girl. Then she grew cold and distant as she watched her friends die over an over again due to forces she can't control and because of kyubey who is a psychopath. Which unlike the godzillza like monsters is an enemy that many people face in real life. One out of every a hundred people is psychopath. In fact it's been alluded many times that feminists who are vehemently against MRA's face may have psychological issues.Like they think all men are rapists because they are psychologically projecting themselves on to all men. We literally to some extent are facing some of the same villains we see in anime. That's why we find these characters relatable

This only explains why we tolerate female characters being bitchy and mean most of the time. It doesn't explain instance like we see in tsundere characters where it's 90%+.

u/ArtemisWild · 1 pointr/Wishlist

I watched a Ted Talk by Jon Ronson and it made me want to read his book, The Psycopath Test

(It's currently in my Audible wishlist because I like to listen to audiobooks in the car on my commute - but I'd be just as happy with a paperback or kindle version) ;)

u/WildeCat96 · 1 pointr/booksuggestions

Not exactly profiling, but The Psychopath Test was a very interesting read and tells you how to truly use the Hare test

u/Darktidemage · 1 pointr/rick_and_morty

I think my post triggered you.

You want to make the video better, change the title

"RICK SANCHEZ IS A PSYCHOPATH"

should be the title.

You flat out SAY he is a psychopath at the 1:31. He "displays all the typical signs"

Your video is based on this sentence : "people think it means you need to axe murder people but the mental health definition differs from this common public perception"

But that IS NOT the public perception. Your audience is not a bunch of morons.

If anything rick and morty fans are probably smarter than average. ... and there is this shit:

https://www.amazon.com/Psychopath-Test-Journey-Through-Industry/dp/1594485755

which is absolutely in common parlance....

" It spent the whole of 2012 on United Kingdom bestseller lists and ten weeks on The New York Times Best Seller list.[1]"

People know what "psychopath" means, and it's SUPER obvious Rick is one.

u/soulcoma · 1 pointr/answers

This is true and I am no expert, but I just read a book, which I will post a link to in a moment. The author states that there really is no specific difference, as in the 'definition', and it really is just a matter of preference which one is used when mentioning the condition outside of a clinical or legal classification.

The book is The Psychopath Test. It's informative and really witty so although it tackles a serious subject, it was a fun read. I highly recommend it. BTW, it was written by the guy who wrote The Men Who Stare At Goats.

u/PraiseBeToScience · 1 pointr/GunsAreCool

> The greed of the gun CEOs, on the other hand, can't be explained as easily by mental illness.

It's been theorized that the occurrence of psychopathy is significantly higher in CEOs than the population at large. I believe the figure is 5x higher. Causation is still being determined. I've seen some studies suggest that obtaining power can cause people to lose empathy, and some have theorized that the modern corporate boardroom is simply the ideal environment for psychopaths to thrive so it attracts them.

I'm pretty sure it's covered in this book. If I could find the actual studies or data, I'd link that. If anyone else knows anything that supports or refutes the claim, I'm all ears.



u/Cesa37 · 1 pointr/science

Are you referring to The psychopath test by Jon Ronson? An excellent book.

u/lankist · 1 pointr/todayilearned

"The Psychopath Test" is pretty good on the subject

Essentially, there aren't many rules in terms of law governing what we call insanity. It's deferred entirely to doctors. That's not necessarily a bad idea, provided the doctors know what they're doing.

It's primarily about a man who committed burglary(?) and, on the advice of a friend, pleaded insane. He would have served like five years in prison if he plead guilty. He spent decades in the institution. His doctors commented that they believed him when he said he faked it, but that only a psychopath would be so manipulatively self-destructive to commit to such a lie.

It also deals with attempts to diagnose high-functioning forms of psychopathy/sociopathy in fields that would, theoretically, attract such types of people (i.e. cutthroat business and politics.) This is based on the eponymous "psychopath test" used to diagnose people with psychopathic conditions--a set of criteria which encompasses far more types of people than are actually diagnosed. The test also veers into circular logic at times (i.e. denying you are a psychopath is a criterion for being a psychopath. "Of course a psychopath would LIE about it!") The core issue of the book is whether the way we define insanity and psychopathy is fair and scientific.

u/crtjer · 1 pointr/Documentaries

This book is actually really and talks about this subject: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1594485755?vs=1

u/doves_n_ravens · 1 pointr/psychology

Its not too new, so you may or may not have heard of this. But I really enjoyed this book as intellectual fun reading and thought I'd suggest it!

The link is to the NY Times review, but here is the amazon link.

It explores Scientology's distain of psychiatric practices, the problems of checklists and self diagnosis, psychopathy in the community, and the role of insanity and the media. Just an all around enjoyable read. :)

u/jbs398 · 1 pointr/pics

Pretty much. I recently read "The Psychopath Test," (just a link to amazon, no affiliate or whatever) and as a conclusion, as with many other diagnoses and diagnostic tools, I came to the conclusion that given the power of such a label it sometimes harms people unnecessarily, but there are people who do not have empathy and they will take advantage of you and other creatures to get pleasure or enjoyment (animal cruelty ranks highly in suggesting psychopathy (aka: antisocial personality disorder)). Sometimes you need someone else to step in if such an individual can't treat other individuals respectably, there is a reason why (even if it might be a last resort) that there are people, given power by your local government, that can intervene when needed.

TL; DR: there's no such thing as black and white (in physics or psychology, but we're getting ahead of ourselves), but there are psychological conditions that cause people to treat others without empathy and sometimes intervention is necessitated if attempts to encourage "reasonable" (where this is determined by the community) behavior fail.

u/CottageMcMurphy · 1 pointr/politics

Lack of empathy = psychopathy

u/rushworld · 1 pointr/worldnews

I read in The Psychopath Test that Autism did increase around the same time as immunisations became "popular" but only because the psychology field had expanded the definition of "Autism" including conditions such as Aspergers and whatnot.

u/whytcolr · 1 pointr/pics

If only there were some way to make the text in this image appear horizontal...

In other news: Here is an online copy of the article. And here's the text of the stuff in the image:

>If: He has too many photos of himself…
>
Maybe he’s just: An artist who does self-portraits.
>
But it could mean: He’s a psychopath.

>Kidding! Kind of. Too many solo photos, or an oil painting of himself, can indicate “an overblown sense of self-worth,” says Jon Ronson, author of The Psychopath Test. Too much gold and other flashy objects suggest grandiosity and narcissism, adds Ronson. “Even if he’s not an actual psychopath, I would avoid a narcissist because he’ll be a pain in the ass,” he says. “Instead, women should stick to nerdy intellectuals, like me!” And me!

In my estimation, the bit in this article about guys who own multiple gaming systems is a bit more of a stretch...

u/AnxiousPolitics · 1 pointr/changemyview

>intelligence indicates failure

That's simply not true at all. Anecdotally we sometimes say smart people have it rough for a few specific reasons some other people might not, but a predictor of failure it is not. In fact, /u/MoliereSC2 posted in this thread an article which says that IQ is actually a great indicator of GDP.
The reason perseverance isn't tied directly into ego is because at some point to remain sane you do have to convince yourself to pursue something in a way that has absolutely nothing to do with who you are, and everything to do with your understanding of the efficacy and importance of what you're doing; of what it is or how it works or what it is for. In order to pursue those things, ego is 'necessarily' out of the equation by definition.
Look, I understand the reaction that most successful people have had big egos, I don't know if you've heard of this or not but this book attempts to go into detail about how and whether the people at the helm of business and perhaps government as well are all crazy in some way. Egotists, psychopaths, you name it. It is cited as saying the percentage for psychopaths in business is 4% which is higher than the percentage of the total population. So there is plenty of reason to 'think' something like ego is involved in it all when considering success.
I don't know if you're aware of it or not, but Trump isn't exactly responsible for his wealth. He has managed what he was given into more money than he started with but he also started with more than enough to take ego completely out of the question when considering what went into the actual decision making process.
In fact, I'm almost inclined to believe the idea of ego necessarily being involved in success has less to do with human nature and an accurate depiction of reality and more to do with the version of celebrity we see on the evening news. When Trump advertises his brand by being the thing he is, it appears ego is all over the picture and it's there by design but to say it bleeds over into all the success and thought processes would be being dishonest about why publicized versions of people aren't accurate.

>No, he was capable of doing so because he obstinately believed in his own odds of success, and this allowed him to overcome many rational perceptions of risks vs potential gains in a way that would cause many rational, "intelligent" people to claim defeat and walk away.

The problem with this is exactly what I already described. The real thought process behind major deals in which a person can retain their sanity by necessity involves a clear understanding of the situation involved and a perseverance not in the face of 'rational perceptions of risk' but perseverance in the championing of the deal they have spent the effort to understand so well.

>part of the reason his presidency has and will continue to be deemed unsuccessful is tied into the fact that he isn't out there criticizing presidents and justifying himself. Bill Clinton spent his last years in office dragging the title of the president through the mud, but now that he's still out in the political world, doing the thumb thing and reminding us how good times were

I'm not sure if you realize this either, but you say in this passage that ego has everything to do with being seen as 'unsuccessful' and not success. I'm not sure if you'll take that as a hit against your view or not since you could believe ego is involved in both success and a lack of success or perceived unsuccessful lives or goals.
So intelligence is a good predictor of success, and perseverance is more honest about the sanity maintaining thought process involved in understanding your risky deals and safe deals than ego would be because ego is often merely part of the branding we see successful people put off in clips on the nightly news.

u/doubleohd · 1 pointr/todayilearned

Read "The Psychopath Test" by Jon Ronson to see how truly messed up it can be on both sides: people who say they're sane when crazy, people who are crazy swear they are sane, and the doctors that sometimes get it wrong. Here's a link

u/meta4our · 1 pointr/todayilearned

If people want to know what it's like on the south side, this book is pretty good http://www.amazon.com/Gang-Leader-Day-Sociologist-Streets/dp/B004E3XDFI

u/SlothMold · 1 pointr/suggestmeabook

Mary Roach has a number of nonfiction books out about different scientific studies covering topics like sex, medical cadavers, Mars colonies, etc. She's very entertaining.

The Poisoner's Handbook by Deborah Blum is nominally about the chemistry of common poisons, but is more about Charles Norris and the development of forensic science.

The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson is a very quick read and a brief overview of studies and interviews with diagnosed sociopaths.

u/fschmidt · 1 pointr/nonmorons

"Cultural authoritarianism"? What bullshit. Authoritarianism is political by definition.

I looked at the questions in your test and they make no sense, so I will not take that test.

On psychopathy I read Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us, The Psychopath: Emotion and the Brain, and The Psychopath Test: A Journey Through the Madness Industry. I can look for articles showing that psychopathy is increasing, if you are interested.

u/BrowncoatDoctor · 1 pointr/WTF

This isn't a hallucination, it's a misperception. Hallucination is when you see something that isn't actually there, but misperception is when you see what is there incorrectly.

EDIT: Read the introduction of Oliver Sacks's Hallucinations. He can explain the difference between the two better than I can.

For those who don't want to go through the effort of reading the whole thing, here's a relevant excerpt:

>Hallucinations may overlap with misperceptions or illusions. If, looking at someone's face, I see only half a face, this is a misperception. The distinction becomes less clear with more complex situations. If I look at someone standing in front of me and see not a single figure but five identical figures, is this "polyopia" a misperception or a halluc9ination? If I see someone cross the room from left to right, then see them crossing the room in precisely the same way again and again, is this sort of repetition a perceptual aberration, a hallucination, or both? We tend to speak of such things as misperceptions or illusions if there is something there to begin with--a human figure, for example--whereas hallucinations are conjured out of thin air. But many of my patients experience outright hallucinations, illusions, and complex misperceptions, and sometimes the line between these is difficult to draw.

u/xrancorx · 1 pointr/Meditation

I would say that there is a great deal of empirical evidence, particularly when we look at cases of mental illness. There is an amazing book on neuropsychology called The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat that describes various states of profoundly altered states of consciousness based on neurological issues. It's a really great read!

Ultimately though I think that the idea that "mind" is something separate from matter is an expression of one's desire for SELF manifesting. "My body may die, but my MIND will live on eternally because it is a fundamental aspect of the universe." However I think that what we consider to be our "mind" is really just an emergent property of various interdependent processes, some tangible and some intangible.

u/r271answers · 0 pointsr/scientology

Somewhat off topic, but I recommend checking out the following (non-Scientology) books which might help you understand what people with some types of dementia may be experiencing. Often people reach out to things like Scientology because they lack people to talk to that they can actually relate to their experiences - or even people that will listen with an open mind.

  • Rethinking Madness by Dr. Paris Williams - this is an academic quality work, btw, not some crazy person rambling (that's important to me)

  • Hallucinations by Dr. Oliver Sacks - a neurologist who has written several popular books about unusual neurological phenomena
u/achikochi · 0 pointsr/cincinnati

Uhhh so much to unpack here

> a lot of these kids who say they are persecuted are usually assholes and/or have very bad interpersonal skills

I think having poor interpersonal skills is a pretty normal thing, especially for kids/teens, and isn't what I was referring to. I was talking more about the straight-up psychopaths, like the guy who initiated this plot.

> Society usually has a way of putting people exactly where they belong.

... maybe, but not in the sense of them sinking to the bottom. This book says it all better than I could.

u/notjakee · 0 pointsr/politics

Trump is the epitome of a sociopath or someone with Anti-Social personality disorder. He's willing to say whatever he needs to to get to the top no matter what the cost is. He's fear mongering in order to get support because there's a large chunk of Americans who are naive enough to give into fear and support him. His only goal? Power. I guarantee trump doesn't give two shits about you or me, even as Americans. He sees you as a number contributing to his campaign. As long as he gets power he's content. He's the owner of a billion dollar enterprise and my guess is he didn't make too many friends getting their but he doesn't care, as long as he has power. Even the fact that he's been in and out of marriages and relationships is a textbook symptom of sociopathy. He's popular because he knows how to rile up people and to get them to believe anything because people are too stupid to understand that he's nothing but a fear-mongering liar. If anyone was going to turn America into a totalitarian state it's him. Thanks for voting for him though you're only enabling fear.

Edit: and if you don't see how this is possible read this book please: https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1594485755/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1468353790&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40&keywords=the+psychopath+test&dpPl=1&dpID=51lkKtVCJPL&ref=plSrch

u/dermballs · 0 pointsr/WTF

The terms sociopath and psychopath are mostly interchangeable. Being psychotic is not a symptom of psychopathy and something completely different, which is what my first comment was alluding to.

Source: Finished reading Jon Ronson's The Psychopath Test recently.

u/mattman59 · 0 pointsr/conspiracy

>Yeah, they're called Zionists, and they want to enslave you in debt, coerce you into fighting and dying fighting Israel's wars, and bomb you with fals flag attacks like 9/11.

That might be true, there might also be evil unicorns living in my closet but I was referring to people who leave evidence, like the Time Square Bomber...well if you can even call him a bomber.

>They're truly dangerous socipaths and fanatacs, all the more so because they have so many brain-dead useful idiots doing a lot of their work for them.

Most Americans would shit their pants if they realize just how common psychopathy really was. Something like 1 in 25 people in the US meet at least a few of the qualifications on the Hare list.

Both of those are amazing books on the subject
http://www.amazon.com/Psychopath-Test-Journey-Through-Industry/dp/1594488010/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_1

http://www.amazon.com/Sociopath-Next-Door-Martha-Stout/dp/0767915828/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1322058965&sr=1-1

u/arnie_apesacrappin · 0 pointsr/AskReddit

Your brother may be a psychopath in the clinical sense. Go through this checklist and see what he scores. If he is near 30 (or over 30) according to the checklist, there probably isn't much you can do for him. You can read more about psychopathy, but the gist is that if he is one, he can't see what he is doing is wrong and won't be able to change.

Please note, I'm not a mental health professional, just someone that read The Psychopath Test. The description of your brother screamed psychopath to me. Counseling could possibly help him, but the way you describe him, he sounds like the kind of person that will either have to monitored his whole life or left to suffer the consequences of his actions.

Edit: I didn't see your comment:

> He tries to pretend he's a sociopath

Until after I commented. So, you have probably already considered what I wrote. If he really does have psychopathic or sociopathic tendencies (or what is labeled antisocial personality disorder now) you don't have a lot of options. See if you can get him help.

u/roboticphish · 0 pointsr/politics

A philosopher, or an expert on political ideologies, would argue that capitalism is the form of economy & government most suited to human nature. In truth, everyone on the planet is concerned primarily with themselves and those closest to them. Even at the very top level (excluding outright sociopaths), wealthy businessmen & women care about their family, friends, and themselves. They aren't much different than the poor folk, only they have influence and power.

And in fact, it's that distinction that sets capitalism apart from other ideologies. Name the families who make up the oligarchy, and you'll come up with a dozen or so names. Waltons, Rockefellers, Kochs, etc. But, there are so many more wealthy people out there who actually did start from nothing. I have two within my own family! One invented the UPC barcoding system, one worked his ass off and is now a rocket scientist, working for massive satellite firms, even NASA at one point. These guys started from a town in Wisconsin of less than 4,000 people. They grew up drinking powdered milk and eating leftovers & casserole. Now they own million dollar homes, vineyards, the whole nine yards.

Now, they certainly had some help along the way (no one can succeed without help), but their success was determined by the willingness to work hard, a small dash of luck, and their willingness to take advantage of the resources that were out there.

I know there's a lot of things wrong with the capitalist system, but the whole idea it's founded upon is that anyone, even a poor-ass peasant, can put in the time and effort required to work their way up. And you know, that aspect is still intact.

u/LucidMetal · -1 pointsr/politics

25% among CEOs. I wish I were making that up!

EDIT: Oops, I meant sociopaths.

Wiki Source

TED Source

Actual Source (includes studies)