Now, with the source game out of the way - you cheated. You said sociopathy is actually a different disorder. I specifically told you not to cheat like that. You’re arguing for garbage medicine. You’re saying sociopathy is a real and very important diagnosis, and not just a Greek buzzword, and your source is a completely different entry in the DSM. You’re a pseudoscientist.
You’ve probably guessed that, in my opinion, this category already exists. It’s called Antisocial Personality Disorder, or ASPD, and it is in the DSM-V.
He contrasts these people with autistic children who are unable to conceptualize the internal lives of others, but distressed when they are able to tell that another person is in pain.
Have you considered even reading those articles. They all clarify the same thing. Psychopath and sociopath are informal terms used to describe what is medically called ASPD. Further, only one even mentions Autism and only to illustrate that it is in contrast to this condition. So do you have any links that say people with Autism are sociopaths as you have asserted?
And to address your edit, I said neither of those things. What I’m saying is that sociopath means something different than Autism. You are being intentionally obtuse, and I tire of it. You said “all autistic people are sociopaths” which is a hurtful, ignorant comment which you have failed to substantiate.
While “sociopathy” isn’t a scientific term, claiming that all autistic people are sociopaths is a harmful false equivalence. Associating autism with the stigma of sociopathy based on your own definition doesn’t hold up. Your sources confirm that “sociopathy” isn’t scientific but don’t support your claim about autism.
ASD and ASPD are distinct conditions, and the colloquial use of “sociopath” generally refers to traits associated with ASPD, not autism. Language evolves over time—consider how “literally” now also means “figuratively” due to ironic use, or how “antisemitism” specifically refers to discrimination against Jews, despite its broader etymological roots. Similarly, “sociopath” today typically refers to ASPD-related traits, not just any “social illness.”
The person you’re responding to provided reputable sources disputing your definition, while your own sources lack expertise in psychology or linguistics. In fact, your third source even contradicts your argument; the article cites a contemporary psychologist who directly contrasts psychopaths with autistic children, highlighting the differences between the two conditions. If you’re calling others “pseudoscientists,” it’s important to evaluate your sources more carefully.
People aren’t downvoting the idea that “sociopathy is nothing to be ashamed of”—that’s a valid point. But instead of playing word games, you could focus on that truth directly.
https://medium.com/@lillieefranks/there-is-no-such-thing-as-a-psychopath-4992690a0044
https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/signs-sociopath
https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/wiring-the-mind/201408/psychopaths-the-worst-people-who-dont-exist
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/laurenstrapagiel/what-is-difference-between-sociopath-pyschopath
Now, with the source game out of the way - you cheated. You said sociopathy is actually a different disorder. I specifically told you not to cheat like that. You’re arguing for garbage medicine. You’re saying sociopathy is a real and very important diagnosis, and not just a Greek buzzword, and your source is a completely different entry in the DSM. You’re a pseudoscientist.
Have you considered even reading those articles. They all clarify the same thing. Psychopath and sociopath are informal terms used to describe what is medically called ASPD. Further, only one even mentions Autism and only to illustrate that it is in contrast to this condition. So do you have any links that say people with Autism are sociopaths as you have asserted?
And to address your edit, I said neither of those things. What I’m saying is that sociopath means something different than Autism. You are being intentionally obtuse, and I tire of it. You said “all autistic people are sociopaths” which is a hurtful, ignorant comment which you have failed to substantiate.
While “sociopathy” isn’t a scientific term, claiming that all autistic people are sociopaths is a harmful false equivalence. Associating autism with the stigma of sociopathy based on your own definition doesn’t hold up. Your sources confirm that “sociopathy” isn’t scientific but don’t support your claim about autism.
ASD and ASPD are distinct conditions, and the colloquial use of “sociopath” generally refers to traits associated with ASPD, not autism. Language evolves over time—consider how “literally” now also means “figuratively” due to ironic use, or how “antisemitism” specifically refers to discrimination against Jews, despite its broader etymological roots. Similarly, “sociopath” today typically refers to ASPD-related traits, not just any “social illness.”
The person you’re responding to provided reputable sources disputing your definition, while your own sources lack expertise in psychology or linguistics. In fact, your third source even contradicts your argument; the article cites a contemporary psychologist who directly contrasts psychopaths with autistic children, highlighting the differences between the two conditions. If you’re calling others “pseudoscientists,” it’s important to evaluate your sources more carefully.
People aren’t downvoting the idea that “sociopathy is nothing to be ashamed of”—that’s a valid point. But instead of playing word games, you could focus on that truth directly.