Kevin Dutton

The phenomena of the world don't come prepackaged into categories. The classic example, used in this book, is colors. Between red and orange there is an infinite number of intermediate hues. But we don't have an infinite number of words to talk about these, we can't distinguish them, and we don't use them. Similarly with most everything. How psychopathic must a person be before they cross the line into clinical diagnosis - or any other psychological dimension that becomes pathological when present in an extreme.

How coarsely or finely we should judge or describe a given situation, that depends on our purpose. Sometimes a major decision must be made in a very short time. Other times it is better to analyze things more precisely.

That's pretty much the message of the book. It turns into 330 pages in a few ways. Yeah, sheer repetition. Plus a bunch of examples. And then there is a lot of a kind of banter, a kind of coarse poetic amplification that is mostly quite sloppy. Alliteration, imagery, kind of a rap rhythm. Maybe for some readers, this will make the book less dull and give a kind of cool hip flavor. Dutton gives us three deeply embedded categories: fight or flight, us or them, right or wrong. So maybe the cool factor is a way of framing the book as being "one of us" for his intended audience - not college professors, that's for sure! Or anyway, only very hip college professors. I must admit, he maps a lot of slogans into those three deeply embedded categories, in ways that don't make much sense to me. Rather than looking deeply into the mapping, he gives us more rap poetry, to get us to sign the contract. Well, he walks his talk, I'll say that!

I'd give the book a lower score because the way it is written... well, it's not for me! But the subject is really important, and Dutton does share some valuable insights. Boil this book down to the maybe 10% that has real meaning, then take that 10% and go deeper with it. Dutton does mention George Lakoff. Maybe I should have read Lakoff instead. Is there anything here that Lakoff hasn't said better? I don't know! Lakoff is kinda more professorial than I can handle! And then here I am complaining!

The most absurd thing - I'm reading the first American edition, FSG 2021, first printing. I presume the 2020 Bantam UK edition had color plates, but my book doesn't. There are a few illustrations where the colors are the whole point. The B&W images show identical shaded blocks, with different color labels below them. Well, I have an imagination! Kind of a waste of paper though.… (lisätietoja)

I wasn't going to read this book because the main argument is silly.

Would it be nice not to feel fear sometimes?
Yes.
Would it mostly be a disadvantage though?
Yes. (the life expectancy of a psychopath is 50)

Would it be nice not to worry about how other people feel sometimes?
Yes.
Would that mostly be terrible though?
Yes.

So I figured the book would be what I said above, then yet another explanation of the Milgram and Standford experiments, bit of game theory, then something about Enron, an inverview with Robert Hare, a list of occasions when being a psychopath is helpful, the end.

Actually, even though he doesn't prove there's any wisdom in psychopathy at all, it's a really good read. Lots of science and experiments that I hadn't read about before and proper, full explanations that meant I learned something even when it was a topic I was already familiar with. (And he skims over the Stanford prison experiment, thank goodness, as soon as I heard the name "Zimbardo" I thought "here we go!" but it was over super quick)

There's a lot of 1 2 = 13 but that's ok, we all used a dodgy argument to tie together interesting ideas for an essay at some point, didn't we? Just me? It gives structure to the book. Daniel Goleman's book "Focus" got a lot of criticism for not doing this, for not having one unifying theme, so what can you do?

The connection between equanimity, mindfulness, and psychopathy is a very real one, it's a pity there was no nod to the people trying to make sure that "McMindnfulness" doesn't get separated from the practices of cultivating compassion. (nice free short-course that goes into this a little here: https://www.open.edu/openlearn/health-sports-psychology/mindfulness-mental-healt...

It's a bit tone deaf at times. One example is that he talks about sex workers being murdered right before a poem about a moth and a flame that goes:

we get bored with routine
and crave beauty
and excitement
fire is beautiful
and we know that if we get
too close it will kill us
but what does that matter
it is better to be happy
for a moment
and be burned up with beauty
than to live a long time
and be bored all the while

I think that would have been better after talking about Andy McNab for example. Separated from the murder of women by a whole chapter or at least a centered tilde

Over all a very nice pop psychology book, not what I expected. I suppose I would have named it "Some Stuff about Psychopaths and Psychology" and done it with no argument, but I doubt anyone would have liked that.

[ 3.5 stars.. I don't think I'll click on them because it will actually hurt the books average if I give it 3 ]… (lisätietoja)