Scan barcode
A review by iggnaseous
The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout
4.0
Though The Sociopath Next Door is ostensibly about sociopathy, and about the potentially frightening phenomenon of sociopaths among us, along the way it suggests something fundamental about moral reasoning and human nature. Sociopaths, Stout explains, are members of a small percentage of the population (about 4% in the US) that do not have a working conscience. Conscience guides and directs behavior, through deep emotional connections to others, to such a degree that it seems impossible that it is not a universal human trait. In the book, those who live and work with sociopaths generate justifications and explanations for their sociopathic behavior. The daughter of a sociopath tells herself that as a child her father didn't talk to her for a week after receiving low marks in school because he's just very demanding; employees of a sociopath CEO say that he is ruthless and cunning; neighbors find a sociopath awful or mean. They do not imagine that these individuals lack a sense of attachment or obligation to others, and cannot form the bonds "closely aligned" with the spectrum of emotions called love. Able to act without the authority of conscience, the regard for how others think and feel, sociopaths have an astonishing advantage over the rest of us, and their psychological states raise some questions about moral theology.
In Romans 1, Paul claims that all humans stand under judgment because the knowledge of God has been revealed to them. Is this knowledge conscience? Aquinas seems to think so. The word conscience comes from conscientia, a term Aquinas used to label the mistake prone human capacity to make decisions about behavior (Stout herself notes this). Given the existence of sociopaths, the plain and universal knowledge of God Paul describes in Romans 1 is not so plain or universal. If there is something like a faint intuitive awareness of God that keeps us from engaging in a long list of debase/ antisocial behavior, sociopaths lack it and therefore the logic of the argument breaks down. Paul’s argument needs refinement.
What of the center of what Paul is saying in that text, "the righteous shall live by faith"? Is it applicable to the sociopath? Or to put it another way: is repentance necessary for salvation? For that matter, what is repentance and is repentance reducible to remorse? If so, can those without remorse be saved? Questions worth pondering.
Stout also raises questions about the basic disposition of human nature and the prevalent "shadow side" theory of human nature--the idea that any human action could be described to any human. Ironically, good-hearted people are usually the most willing to ascribe to the most radical form of this theory. They could, under the right circumstances, become mass murderers. Against this fundamentally pessimistic characterization of the human person as having a proclivity to turn evil, Stout argues that the conscious-bound person "does not, in some sense cannot," kill, rape, torture, or steal. They cannot "trick someone into a loveless relationship" nor willfully abandon their own children. They might do so under the influence of a malevolent leader, a psychotic break, or drugs, but otherwise this behavior is most often limited to sociopaths.
Though at times Stout seems to glamorize sociopaths rather than criticize them, she nonetheless has written a thought-provoking, entertaining, and even lyrical study. Stout's psychological insights reveal the inner workings of the morally and raise philosophical and theological questions. Stout astutely makes some of these connections herself, providing the reader with a jumping off point for further reflection. Ultimately, The Sociopath Next Door is about what makes people good, and that is something worth thinking about.
In Romans 1, Paul claims that all humans stand under judgment because the knowledge of God has been revealed to them. Is this knowledge conscience? Aquinas seems to think so. The word conscience comes from conscientia, a term Aquinas used to label the mistake prone human capacity to make decisions about behavior (Stout herself notes this). Given the existence of sociopaths, the plain and universal knowledge of God Paul describes in Romans 1 is not so plain or universal. If there is something like a faint intuitive awareness of God that keeps us from engaging in a long list of debase/ antisocial behavior, sociopaths lack it and therefore the logic of the argument breaks down. Paul’s argument needs refinement.
What of the center of what Paul is saying in that text, "the righteous shall live by faith"? Is it applicable to the sociopath? Or to put it another way: is repentance necessary for salvation? For that matter, what is repentance and is repentance reducible to remorse? If so, can those without remorse be saved? Questions worth pondering.
Stout also raises questions about the basic disposition of human nature and the prevalent "shadow side" theory of human nature--the idea that any human action could be described to any human. Ironically, good-hearted people are usually the most willing to ascribe to the most radical form of this theory. They could, under the right circumstances, become mass murderers. Against this fundamentally pessimistic characterization of the human person as having a proclivity to turn evil, Stout argues that the conscious-bound person "does not, in some sense cannot," kill, rape, torture, or steal. They cannot "trick someone into a loveless relationship" nor willfully abandon their own children. They might do so under the influence of a malevolent leader, a psychotic break, or drugs, but otherwise this behavior is most often limited to sociopaths.
Though at times Stout seems to glamorize sociopaths rather than criticize them, she nonetheless has written a thought-provoking, entertaining, and even lyrical study. Stout's psychological insights reveal the inner workings of the morally and raise philosophical and theological questions. Stout astutely makes some of these connections herself, providing the reader with a jumping off point for further reflection. Ultimately, The Sociopath Next Door is about what makes people good, and that is something worth thinking about.