American psychiatrist Hervey Cleckley (1903–1984) was a brilliant professional able to observe in detail the clinical aspects of psychopathy.
His main book, The Mask of Sanity, from 1941, describes sixteen psychopaths who passed through his office or were admitted to the centers where he practiced psychiatry throughout his career.
- Have you ever wondered what psychopathy is? How could we define that? This psychiatrist revolutionized the studies in his field and.
- More specifically.
- He deepened and advanced his studies in psychopathy.
- In this article we present the secrets of your research.
Based on observations made to her own patients, Hervey Cleckley hypothesized that psychopaths suffer from basic emotional deficits and discernment that prevents them from living life on the same level as others.
Therefore, they are people who have certain difficulties in accepting and integrating into the social, ethical, legal and moral standards of a society.
In addition, Hervey Cleckley also collected the main characteristics of psychopathy and divided them into a total of sixteen basic criteria, divided into three groups:
Based on previously exposed bases, Hervey Cleckley has developed her studies on psychopathy, expanding the field and defining its main characteristics.
Cleckley described the psychopath as a charismatic, sincere and enjoyable person most of the time, and generally gives the impression of being a person with superior intelligence, perfect reasoning and high skills.
They understand, understand and discuss social norms in a very logical way, in addition to the action-consequence relationship of their actions.
In addition, the author suggested that in situations where a person should experience nervousness, tension or stress, psychopaths should remain calm and without symptoms of anxiety.
On the other hand, in most of the cases studied by this author, psychopathy was a protective factor against suicide ideas and attempts.
That is, despite the chaotic and self-destructive lives presented by these individuals, the only attempts to end their lives were empty attempts and mere premeditated strategies to attract the attention and favor of their families.
Because of their actions, often harmful to their family, close friends and themselves, these patients responded by lying, hiding and blaming others without any remorse or shame, which is why Cleckley has come to the conclusion that the psychopath’s indifference to the truth is remarkable.
This fact, combined with its superficial charm and its great power of conviction and manipulation, makes it difficult to distinguish whether the person is sincere. Even with clear evidence to the contrary, it’s hard not to doubt your arguments.
“Even with the detailed account of Anna’s story clearly in mind, it was difficult not to conclude that all the well-proven facts of this story should be ignored, as they were contradicted by the obvious character of this beautiful woman. The Mask of Reason, p. 103) Hervey Cleckley
As for the emotional capacity of their patients, although they swear with total credibility to profess a feeling of love for family members, wives or children, their actions affirm otherwise.
The feelings of these individuals seemed to be merely superficial. Their emotions, as they looked outward, were totally convincing, they could be motivated by more logical than visceral problems, such as avoiding punishment or achieving something.
Therefore, no matter what sacrifice people make for them, no matter what evidence of love or appreciation they show, psychopaths are not able to respond with the same degree or intensity.
The human axiom that one good job is returned with another is only valid for him when it comes to using it to achieve a goal.
Finally, it is worth mentioning, in the emotional sphere, the promiscuity shown by all the last cases analyzed in Cleckley’s work, reflecting an attitude of promiscuity and multiplicity of sexual partners.
In some cases, these people also use the prostitute service and are unfaithful to their partners. These behaviors are due, according to the author, to the lack of moderation and impulsivity presented by psychopaths.
In addition, indifference to your obligations and the consequences of your actions, lack of guilt, remorse or shame are also relevant.
The psychopathic model described by Cleckley relates the use and abuse of alcohol, does not follow any life plan, because it is not able to maintain any effort directed for any purpose and is therefore unreliable.
Moreover, the psychopath’s judgment hardly changes with experience, so he does not learn from his mistakes and constantly commits the same acts, a fact that is accentuated if, in the absence of remorse and shame, indifference to consequences and lack of discernment is manifested. Additional.
This problem of judgment arises when you look at your actions and the history of your life. However, in hypothetical situations where there is a moral dilemma, the psychopath’s judgment is incredible.
As a final feature, it should be noted that the crimes of psychopaths described in Cleckley’s work were rather minor.
The author alludes to minor theft, vehicle theft, participation in fights, public scandals, false controls, etc. Only three of the sixteen cases reported by the author are totally and recurrently aggressive.
Despite this, the main characteristic by which this criterion is distinguished is the lack of motivation in antisocial behavior, most of them performed without a specific purpose or with costs far greater than their benefits.
As regards common criminals or criminals, the differences between them and psychopaths are based, according to the author, on the lack of discernment and, moreover, on the intent of the facts.
Thus, the common offender recognizes that his acts (crimes) are a means of achieving certain objectives Are these objectives normally understood?
This does not happen in the case of psychopaths, who do not have a specific purpose or an understandable reason for performing these types of acts.
Therefore, they can steal a minimum amount of money, risking being discovered even if they have a significantly high financial situation. Added to this and linking these events to a lack of knowledge, Cleckley said:
? (Other offenders) do not seem to have this strange belief that they are, or should be, one way or another free from arrests made to control those who commit the crimes for which they themselves have been convicted (The Mask of Reason, p. 172)?Hervey Cleckley
The description of the psychopathic profile that was developed in this article is based on a reference book and is fundamental in the study of psychopathy.
However, we must understand and take into account the time, context and rarity of the scientific literature that existed on the subject when Hervey Cleckley published The Mask of Sanity more than seventy years ago.
Therefore, remember that scientific progress and subsequent research have retouched, refined and expanded all of Cleckley’s original proposals.
Still, his important contribution to understanding this construction remains invaluable.
Thus, the name Hervey Cleckley will always be linked to psychiatry and, more specifically, to the study of psychopathy.
Probably, without his studies and his work The Mask of Sanity, much of the subsequent research on this subject would never have been developed, so his legacy remains in force even as a reference, as the door that has been opened to future research in the field of psychopathy.