Introduction
Psychopathy has been described in many ways. It has been described as a personality disorder characterized by anti-social behavioural patterns, lack of empathy and behavioral control as well as a ruthless dominance. (Skeem et al., 2011). All human beings exhibit brutality to some degree. Psychopathy refers to the highest degree of brutality. However brutality cannot be precisely measured, therefore psychopathy cannot be properly defined. From the point of view of evolution, psychopathy did not seem to fit into the theory. However if we examine the theory closely we find that ever since the Stone Age, the most brutal individuals could survive because they excelled at what they did. They were not hindered by compassion or other emotions. Thus, we can glimpse the psychopaths ever since the evolution of man.
However, this theory is contradicted by the very nature of psychopaths. Psychopaths enjoy killing. If they exist in a group, they are likely to eliminate the group by killing the members. Psychopaths are not likely to pro-generate because by their very nature they are not compassionate and loving. Therefore, many experts consider their existence an anomaly. This paper tries to explain the existence of psychopaths’ vis-à-vis the evolution theory.
Explanations for Existence of Psychopathy
There is an ongoing debate among experts regarding the causes of psychopathy. Some of the causes cited are – Childhood triggers, Environmental, Neurological and genetic. Research suggests anti-social behaviour is indeed of genetic origin. (Blair, Mitchell, and Blair, 2005: 29). It is this genetic origin which leads us to the evolutionary theory of psychopathy. This means that some people have psychopathic tendencies because they are born with the genes which propagate this behaviour. These genes are activated in certain circumstances, and cause the individual to commit crimes. Parez (2012) claims that psychopathy is caused by an impairment in the brain. Other researchers claim that child hood trauma and abuse causes psychopathy. A person develops a hatred for the world due to some incident which occurred in his early childhood and this causes him to behave brutally and dis-compassionately. Hare (1993: 158) on the other hand claims that these traits appear at a very early age and are therefore not related to child abuse.
On close observation one finds that all these explanations relate to the evolutionary theory. Even if certain individuals are affected by child abuse and turn out to be psychopaths, they do have underlying genes which are activated by the abuse. This fact can be explained by the evolutionary theory. Childhood triggers, neurology, and environmental causes may all be proximate causes of the condition; however the evolution theory lies at the basis of each of these causes.
The Evolutionary explanation
The Cheater Theory
The evolution theory of psychopathy suggests that they were born of a freak gene pool and the trait managed to survive through the generations. In other words, they passed the natural process of selection and elimination and survived. Grant T. and Harris et. al. put forth the theory of “a nonpathological, reproductively viable, alternate life history strategy” in their paper Coercive and Precocious Sexuality as a Fundamental Aspect of Psychopathy published in 2007, which corroborates the evolution theory. They state that mankind in the earlier ages formed themselves into groups based on certain rules. However, there were “cheaters” even then. These people lived within the groups suppressing their psychopathic tendencies and contaminated the gene pool. The “Cheater theory” suggested by researchers like Frank, (1988), and other researchers, states that psychopaths were selected during the process like other cheaters. Because the psychopathy was not evident, the psychopaths mingled with the group and spread the gene.
The Brutality Theory
The brutality theory can also be termed as survival of the fittest. This theory claims that the most ruthless members survived in the early ages by exhibiting “brutality” which attracted the other members towards them. These men attracted the females and pro-generated others like them, thus preserving the psychopathic gene and passing it on to younger generations. According to Pinker (2011), crimes like homicide and infanticide and brutal punishments were ordinary life events in the early ages. Only after the onset of civilization and formation of governments, did these events reduce in frequency and come to be considered as crimes. Other researchers have supported the theory of brutality in other ways stating that if it were not for governmental control, all men would be at war against one another. In fact, the evolution theory itself puts forth man as a savage before the advent of civilization.
Objections to the Brutality Theory
The brutality theory states that the fittest and most brutal of men survived and attracted other members to them. It stands to reason that these men would protect those whom they attracted. Based on this reasoning, some may object that psychopaths would kill only “others” whom he does not wish to protect. However, the fact is that psychopaths kill ruthlessly without any consideration or compassion for the victim. The brutality theory does not fit into this reasoning. The only way it may be explained is that the “societies” of early ages were more of “groups” where the members were “related” to one another. As such, the psychopath protected his “group” by brutally killing members of other groups and helping his group to survive.
Conclusion
Despite the objections to the brutality theory, the evolutionary theory can accommodate the existence of psychopathy. Brutal individuals have existed ever since the early ages. The groups of such brutal individuals were at an advantage. Even assuming that each group had some brutal individuals, the number of individuals and the degree of brutality varied making one group superior to another. The theory of brutality has been well supported by researchers and we may conclude that psychopaths have been in existence ever since the evolution of man and they will continue to exist until the world exists. With the advent of civilization and government rules, these psychopaths became social outcasts and were termed as criminals and were punished. Brutality at some level is required by society to wage wars and perform executions. Therefore one may say that psychopaths may not be totally eliminated.
References
Beaver, K. M., Vaughn, M. G., DeLisi, M., Barnes, J. C., & Boutwell, B. B. (2012). The neuropsychological underpinnings to psychopathic personality traits in a nationally representative and longitudinal sample. Psychiatric Quarterly, 83(2), 145-159.
Blair, J., Mitchell, D., & Blair, K. (2005). The psychopath:
Skeem, J. L.; Polaschek, D. L. L.; Patrick, C. J.; Lilienfeld, S. O. (2011). "Psychopathic Personality: Bridging the Gap Between Scientific Evidence and Public Policy". Psychological Science in the Public Interest 12 (3): 95–162. doi:10.1177/1529100611426706.
Blair, J., Mitchell, D., & Blair, K. (2005). The psychopath: emotion and the brain. MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Perez, P. R. (2012). The etiology of psychopathy: A neuropsychological perspective. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17(6), 519-522.
Hare, R. Dr. (1993). Without conscience: The disturbing world of the psychopaths among us. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
2007 The Guilford Press
COERCIVE AND PRECOCIOUS SEXUALITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL ASPECT OF PSYCHOPATHY Grant T. Harris, PhD, Marnie E. Rice, PhD, N. Zoe Hilton, PhD, Martin L. Lalumie ` re, PhD, and Vernon L. Quinsey, PhD
Frank, R. (1988). Passions within reason; the strategic role of the emotions. New York, New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Pinker, S. (2011). Better angels of our nature: Why violence has declined. USA: Viking Adult
