Johns Hopkins Psych finally said it: Malignant Narcissism

[politicat]

33. The funny thing is? Sociopaths can be easier to deal with because they understand rules.

The differential diagnosis criteria breaks down like this: A sociopath can maintain relationships and follow social rules as long as they understand the personal benefit to maintaining those relationships and following the rules and consider the personal benefit greater than the potential gain. Their relationships are extremely transactional, very tit for tat, but the potential is there. (The current argument on this diff dx issue is do we roll psychopathy into sociopathy, and if not, what is the diff dx? My personal leaning, though it's not my area of work at all, so I barely have any input, is that psychopathy is when someone cannot maintain relationships and follow rules, even when doing so is of benefit.) Basically, one can negotiate with a sociopath, given that one is willing to stick very closely to the established rules and enforce the boundary, because the sociopath won't unless they are closely monitored. And sociopaths tend not to care about the attention of others, so they're more likely to stick to a deal as long as it remains beneficial.

Versus narcissism, where relationships are maintained at a superficial level as a means of gaining attention, and social rules only exist for other people or when the rules benefit the narcissist. Narcissism doesn't fully admit to the existence of other people while deeply needing the attention of other people. Narcissism only cares about social rules when those rules are serving their needs for attention. Oh, they will complain when they're held to a rule or contract, but that's part of the performance. It's all attention. As soon as the attention dies or shifts, they need it back, and they don't care if it's positive or negative attention. Disapproval is almost as potent as approval. A narcissist is likely to stir a pot or cause drama or break a deal just because it's gotten too quiet. And they have no interest in learning the rules of the game. They're more unpredictable in that way. (Their behaviors tend to be predictable, and what will provoke them tends to be predictable, but what trips their boredom/attention supply is less predictable.)

I don't know about Pence or Bush, but I do know they both have a track record of playing mostly within the political rules. It's the difference between Chaotic Evil and Lawful Evil, to use the DnD construction. Sociopathy tends towards the lawful side. And it's much easier to deal with someone who will agree to a set of rules, even if they negotiate the rules mostly to benefit themselves.

But I wouldn't even go that far, actually. Pence has maintained relationships. He is self-serving, without a doubt, and is convinced of his rightness, but that's true of a lot of his co-religionists and local culture. Is he a product of his dysfunctional culture? YES. But he's also tainted now, and any rehab he wants to do will rely on his adherence to the rules. He will have to prove himself utterly unlike the ^.

I am not going anywhere near Cheney. That's all sorts of license killer.