Tagged: ethics Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • GeneticPsychosMom (Tina) 10:08 on November 21, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , ethics, , , , , , , ,   

    Why We Should Psych Test Political Candidates 

    Would you vote for this Manson?

    Would you vote for this guy?

    It is inconceivable that a criminal psychopath such as Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, or Charles Manson could ever be elected president of the United States. But maybe one of their less brazen siblings could. That scenario is not only conceivable, but probable-if not already a fait accompli. And this is why I propose an amendment to the Constitution that would require presidential candidates to undergo psychological testing, the results of which would be made public.

    Just beneath our antiquated social radar is a thriving nest of subcriminal, or socialized, psychopaths. Though their deviancy is masked and their crimes less revolting, these psychopaths nonetheless pose grave dangers to our collective well-being.

    In Without Conscience, Dr. Robert D. Hare, one of the world’s foremost authorities in the area of psychopathy, says that such psychopaths “appear to function reasonably well-as lawyers, doctors, psychiatrists, academics, mercenaries, police officers, cult leaders, military personnel, businesspeople, writers, artists, entertainers and so forth-without breaking the law, or at least without being caught and convicted. These individuals are every bit as egocentric, callous, and manipulative as the average criminal psychopath; however, their intelligence, family background, social skills, and circumstances permit them to construct a façade of normalcy and to get what they want with relative impunity.”

    What is a psychopath and why should we be concerned that such a person would become president of the United States? A checklist of emotional and interpersonal traits of such people would include: a grandiose sense of self-worth, pathological lying, lack of remorse or guilt, shallow emotions, lack of empathy, poor behavioral controls, lack of realistic long-term plans, impulsivity, and irresponsibility. Hmmm, let’s see: do we really want a president whose core behavioral patterns include lying, cheating, cruelty, irresponsibility, lack of remorse, poor relationships, exploitation, manipulation, destructiveness, irritability, and aggressiveness?

    Most alarming of all is the “frightful and perplexing theme that runs through the case histories of all psychopaths: a deeply disturbing inability to care about the pain and suffering experienced by others-in short, a complete lack of empathy, the prerequisite for love.” If this inability to experience or care about others’ pain and suffering marries compulsive lying in the Church of No Conscience, presided over by Impulsivity-well, good lord, that’s a train wreck for sure.

    It is unconscionable to elect a president who lacks empathy and conscience, honesty and integrity, and mature impulse control. Shouldn’t these qualities represent the minimum standard of mental health for someone who is commander-in-chief of the largest military force in the world and who has virtually unlimited power to affect the lives of billions of people?

    It’s not easy to know if candidates for president are mentally sound. At the moment, the only requirements for holding office are set forth in Article II, Section I of the Constitution. It specifies that, to be president or vice president, a person must be a natural-born citizen of the United States, at least 35 years of age, and a resident of the United States for at least 14 years. That’s it; nothing more-except tons of cash. I don’t like that the bar is set so low.

    How can we, the citizens who are charged with making wise and considered choices about who becomes president, evaluate whether a candidate is mentally sound or suffering from mental illness? We do not have that kind of access to candidates, who we finally empower to set our national priorities, influence public policy, command the military, raise or lower taxes, establish budgets, maintain or violate treaties, assemble a cabinet, and so much more. We can only witness manufactured, media-based performances that are scripted and rehearsed to produce an effect. We need to get behind the curtain of smoke and mirrors, behind the misdirection antics of press secretaries and publicists, to see who is really pulling the levers. We need a way to ascertain the mental health of presidential candidates before they are granted world-shaking powers.

    So, I propose a Constitutional Amendment calling for all candidates to submit to a battery of psychological tests to be administered and interpreted by eminent psychologists-and the results made public. I’m surprised this hasn’t already occurred. After all, psychological tests, along with drug and polygraph tests and background investigations, are routinely required in the public safety sector, including police officers, correctional officers, dispatchers, security guards, park rangers, SWAT teams, fire fighters, and emergency medical technicians. Military psychologists conduct psychological testing and applicant assessment for general fitness-for-duty and for highly sensitive jobs requiring security clearances. (It’s interesting to note that the Department of Defense employs more psychologists than any other organization or company in the world.) Courts may sometimes order a battery of psych tests to determine parental fitness. Work-related aptitude, ability, and personality trait testing, a billion dollar industry, is common practice in Fortune 500 companies. In a document entitled “Nuclear Security-Before and After September 11,” the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission “requires background checks for nuclear facility employees to ensure that they are trustworthy. Every employee who has access to safety equipment is required to pass background checks, including an examination of past employment, references, credit history, education history, military service history, an FBI criminal record check, as well as to undergo psychological testing. While on the job, each employee is also subject to random drug and alcohol testing.”

    Granted, working in a nuclear facility is an important and sensitive job and I can understand the rigorous screening procedures intended to qualify a candidate’s worthiness to handle the job.
    I’d like to have an equivalent screening process for candidates for president. I’d like to know that they have a human heart that can feel the pain and suffering of others. I’d like to know they have a conscience to hold their base instincts in check. I’d like to know if they can tell the truth or whether they are compulsive liars. I’d like to know they can work cooperatively with others. I’d like to know that they are not seeking to conquer the world as compensation for lovelessness. I’d like to know that they respect living things, that they have a sense of the sacred. I’d like to know that their soul moves toward peace, not war; toward forgiveness, not vengeance; toward freedom, not oppression; toward tolerance, not hatred. I’d like to know these things. This is where I want to set the bar.

    As it is now, I don’t take any candidate at his or her word. I don’t trust any of them to represent their true motives and goals. A Constitutional Amendment requiring candidates to be evaluated for mental health is one way we can level the playing field in our search for the truth about candidates. In 1972, George McGovern initially selected Thomas Eagleton, a senator from Missouri, as his running mate. What McGovern didn’t know at the time was that Eagleton had been treated for depression with electroshock treatments. In the eyes of many Americans, that meant Eagleton was not fit to be president, and as a result of the public disclosure of these facts, McGovern asked Eagleton to resign. My guess is that in the eyes of most Americans, a psychopath is not fit to be president.

    There are a number of valid and reliable tests used to evaluate and assess a person’s personality traits and psychological health. The Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2) can provide a comprehensive assessment of adult psychopathology and can help assess major symptoms of social and personal maladjustment.
    With good reason, we already require firefighters and police officers and nuclear facility workers to be rigorously evaluated. With equal good sense and foresight, we should now apply the same standard to candidates for president.

    © 2004/Robert Rabbin/All rights reserved Robert Rabbin is a writer and speaker whose twin passions of spiritual wisdom and social justice are expressed in his column of social commentary.

    Excerpt from “Why We Should Psych Test Political Candidates” by Robert Rabbin, 11 January 2004

    Photo courtesy NPR.org

     

    Psychopath TEST Politicians

    .

    .

     
  • GeneticPsychosMom (Tina) 11:04 on November 18, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , ethics, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,   

    The Corporate Psychopath’s Arsenal 

    An adult having a childish tantrum = psychopathy

    An adult having a childish tantrum = psychopathy

    Psychopathy, often confused with sociopathy, is typically defined as a personality disorder with symptoms of persistent antisocial behaviour such as frequent violence; impaired or nil empathy and remorse, and brash, disinhibited, egotistical personas. Whilst the term is often used by the media to describe the psychotic and mentally ill, Professor Robert Hare, the creator of the ‘Psychopathy Checklist’, explains that psychopaths are not disorientated with reality and suffering from hallucinations or extreme distress but rather are very rational and have a high awareness of their behaviour and environment. All of their resulting actions are made out of choice and are freely exercised.

    The Psychopathy Checklist, the most valid and reliable psychopathy measuring tool, points to three recurring observable characteristics of psychopathy: boldness, disinhibition and meanness. Psychopaths are well-known for their lack of empathy, coupled with predatory and parasitic behaviour. They are found in 1% of the general population but the number rises to 3.5% at the management level in corporate organisations.

    The Corporate Psychopath’s Behaviour

    Corporate Psychopaths are too often successful in organisations and the workplace. They are very career orientated but behaviourally they are ruthless, unethical, manipulative and extremely exploitative in order to quickly climb the corporate ladder. Some behavioural trademarks are:

    • Superficial charisma
    • Emotionally shallow
    • Pathological lying and manipulation
    • Lack of empathy, remorse or guilt
    • Promiscuous sexual behaviour
    • Grandiose sense of self-worth
    • Constant impulsive and irresponsible behaviour
    • Lack of realistic long term goals

    Psychopathic behaviour differs when exposed in different environments. At an organisational level or within the workplace environment, these behaviours would typically result in scenarios such as:

    • Frequent temper tantrums to cause high anxiety amongst peers
    • Ridiculing or blaming others for bad work performance
    • Intentionally spreading malicious lies for their benefit
    • Stealing credit for the accomplishments of others or sabotaging others
    • Refusing to take responsibility for behaviour or errors
    • Doing whatever it takes to close a deal with no regards for ethics or legality
    • Often taking the belongings of others without any intention of returning

    Research shows that there are more instances of corporate psychopathic behaviour at the management level when compared to the general population, the reported scenarios are as such:

    • Setting unrealistic and unachievable expectations to set employees up for failure
    • Reluctance or refusal outright to attend meetings with more than one person
    • Threatens perceived opponents with dismissal or discipline in order to taint employee profile
    • Refusal to provide sufficient training or instructions to victim
    • Invasion of personal privacy of employees
    • Multiple sexual encounters with junior and/or senior employees
    • Developing new ideas without real follow through
    • Public humiliation of others and even encouraging of peers to torment or humiliate others

    Havens for Corporate Psychopathy

    Corporate Psychopaths are attracted to organisations and positions where they can easily gain power, influence, position, prestige and money typically in the financial services, media and legal sector. Other less known sectors include the civil services (e.g. the military, police, government and even the clergy). Clive Boddy’s paper on “The Corporate Psychopaths Theory of the Global Financial Crisis” comprehensively explains and illustrates how corporate psychopathy when left to flourish at the top hierarchy of companies, specifically Wall Street Banks, were the main culprits of the Financial Crisis of 2007-08 in America. None of the biggest culprits were prosecuted and they got away scot-free with their ill-gotten gains. What was most revealing was their behaviour: their total lack of empathy for the chaos and massive suffering they had caused to individuals, economies and countries.

    There are measures to identify, prevent and monitor instances of corporate psychopathic behaviour in the workplace. The dilemma is the reluctance to use them due to company policies, data protection and confidentiality clauses. In our next article in this series, we will delve deeper into details concerning workplace norms, employment cases, legal implications and penalties of corporate psychopathy from a British perspective.

    Excerpt from “The Corporate Psychopath’s Arsenal” By C.H.I. Talent Assessment, Nov 8 2016

     
  • GeneticPsychosMom (Tina) 10:45 on October 3, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , ethics, , , , , , , , , , ,   

    10 Ways Manipulators Use Emotional Intelligence for Evil 

    evil grin

    Emotional intelligence is nothing new.

    Sure, the term was coined in the 1960s, and popularized by psychologists in recent decades. But the concept of emotional intelligence–which I define as a person’s ability to recognize and understand emotions and use that information to guide decision making–has been around as long as we have.

    This skill we refer to as emotional intelligence (also known as EI or EQ) is like any other ability: You can cultivate it, work to enhance it, sharpen it.

    And it’s important to know that, just like other skills, emotional intelligence can be used both ethically and unethically.

    The dark side of emotional intelligence

    Organizational psychologist and best-selling author Adam Grant identified EI at its worst in his essay for The Atlantic, “The Dark Side of Emotional Intelligence“:

    Recognizing the power of emotions…one of the most influential leaders of the 20th century spent years studying the emotional effects of his body language. Practicing his hand gestures and analyzing images of his movements allowed him to become “an absolutely spellbinding public speaker,” says the historian Roger Moorhouse–“it was something he worked very hard on.”

    His name was Adolf Hitler.

    The last thing anyone wants is to be manipulated, whether it’s by politicians, colleagues, or even those who claim to be our friends.

    Below, I’ve listed 10 ways emotional intelligence can be used against you. Of course, these actions and characteristics don’t always identify a lack of ethics; a person may practice them unintentionally. Nonetheless, increasing awareness of these behaviors will equip you to deal with them strategically, and sharpen your own EQ in the process.

    1. They play on fear.

    A manipulator will exaggerate facts and overemphasize specific points in an effort to scare you into action.

    Strategy: Beware of statements that imply you lack courage or attempts to instill a fear of missing out. Make sure you have the whole picture of a situation before taking action.

    2. They deceive.

    All of us value transparency and honesty, but manipulators hide the truth or try to show you only one side of the story. For example, consider the manager or employee who purposefully spreads unconfirmed rumors and gossip to gain a strategic advantage.

    Strategy: Don’t believe everything you hear. Rather, base your decisions on reputable sources and ask questions when details aren’t clear.

    3. They take advantage when you’re happy.

    Often, we’re tempted to say yes to anything when we’re in an especially good mood, or jump on opportunities that look really good at the time (but that we haven’t really thought through). Manipulators know how to take advantage of those moods.

    Strategy: Work to increase awareness of your positive emotions just as much as your negative emotions. When it comes to making decisions, strive to achieve balance.

    4. They take advantage of reciprocity.

    Manipulators know it’s harder to say no if they do something for you–so they may attempt to flatter, butter you up, or say yes to small favors…and then ask you for big ones.

    Strategy: For sure, giving brings more joy than receiving.

    But it’s also important to know your limitations. And don’t be afraid to say no when appropriate.

    5. They push for home-court advantage.

    “A manipulative individual may insist on you meeting and interacting in a physical space where he or she can exercise more dominance and control,” says Preston Ni, author of How to Successfully Handle Manipulative People.

    These people may push to negotiate in a space where they feel ownership and familiarity, like their office, home, or any other place you might feel less comfortable.

    Strategy: If you need to negotiate, offer to do so in a neutral space. If you must meet the person on his or her home turf, ask for a drink of water and engage in small talk upon arrival, to help you get your bearings.

    6. They ask lots of questions.

    It’s easy to talk about ourselves. Manipulators know this, and they take advantage by asking probing questions with a hidden agenda–discovering hidden weaknesses or information they can use to their advantage.

    Strategy: Of course, you shouldn’t assume wrong motives in everyone who wants to get to know you better. But beware of those who only ask questions–while refusing to reveal the same information about themselves.

    7. They speak quickly.

    At times, manipulators will speak at a faster pace or use special vocabulary and jargon in an attempt to gain advantage.

    Strategy: Don’t be afraid to ask people to repeat their point, or to ask questions for clarity. You can also repeat their point in your words, or ask them to name an example–allowing you to regain control of the conversation.

    8. They display negative emotion.

    Some people purposefully raise their voice or use strong body language to show they’re upset, in an effort to manipulate your emotions. (Basketball coaches are masters at this.)

    Strategy: Practice the pause. If someone demonstrates strong emotion, take a moment before reacting. In some instances, you may even walk away for a few minutes.

    9. They give you an extremely limited time to act.

    An individual may try and force you to make a decision within a very unreasonable amount of time. In doing so, he or she wants to coerce you into a decision before you have time to weigh the consequences.

    Strategy: Don’t submit to unreasonable demands. If your partner refuses to give you more time, you’re better off looking for what you need somewhere else.

    10. They give you the silent treatment.

    “By deliberately not responding to your reasonable calls, text messages, emails, or other inquiries, the manipulator presumes power by making you wait, and intends to place doubt and uncertainty in your mind,” says Ni. “The silent treatment is a head game, where silence is used as a form of leverage.”

    Strategy: After you’ve attempted communication to a reasonable degree, give your partner a deadline. In situations where alternatives are unavailable, a frank discussion addressing his or her communication style may be necessary.

    Putting it into practice

    There will always be those who work to increase their emotional awareness–in both themselves and others. Sometimes, they’ll use that power for manipulative influence.

    And that’s exactly why you should sharpen your own emotional intelligence–to protect yourself when they do.

    (If you’d like more tips on how to make your emotions work for you, instead of against you, make sure to sign up for my free monthly newsletter.)

     .
    .
     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
%d bloggers like this: