Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us

“Ray had an incredible ability to con not just me but everybody. He could talk, and like, with a smoothness and a directness that sometimes momentarily disarmed even the most experienced and cynical of the prison staff.”

Here, the author describes Ray, the first psychopath he encountered while working as a prison psychologist. Ray epitomizes the ability of psychopaths to charm, manipulate, and deceive others, as he convinces Hare that a series of unsuitable transfers will benefit his rehabilitation. Ray’s success in exploiting Hare and other more experienced members of the prison’s staff demonstrates the almost preternatural persuasive power of psychopaths.

“For most people, the confusion and uncertainty surrounding this subject begin with the word psychopathy itself. Literally it means mental illness (from psyche, ‘mind’; and pathos, ‘disease’), and this is the meaning of the term still found in some dictionaries. The confusion is also compounded by the media use of the term as the equivalent of ‘insane’ or ‘crazy’: ‘The police say a “psycho” is on the loose,’ or, ‘The guy who killed her must be a “psycho.”’”

Hare explores psychopathy, presenting it as a disorder that is poorly understood. He points out that the Greek origins of the word are misleading as they imply the existence of psychosis—a symptom psychopaths do not experience. Furthermore, in the media, the word “psycho” has become synonymous with mental illness, although psychopaths are considered legally sane. Hare aims to address such misconceptions in his book by providing a clear explanation of the traits of psychopathy.

“However, except in movies and books, very few psychopaths commit crimes of this sort. Their callousness typically emerges in less dramatic, though still devastating, ways: parasitically bleeding other people of their possessions, savings, and dignity; aggressively doing and taking what they want; shamefully neglecting the physical and emotional welfare of their families; engaging in an unending series of casual, impersonal, and trivial sexual relationships; and so forth.”

Hare argues that many people’s conception of psychopaths derives from sensationalized fictional portrayals. He suggests that the notion of psychopaths as depraved serial killers distracts from the reality of the disorder. Most are not violent criminals, but their predatory and remorseless behaviors nevertheless cause significant harm. The author’s choice of emotionally charged vocabulary underscores the devastating impact of psychopathy. Although describing non-violent psychopaths, Hare uses words that evoke images of violence, such as “bleeding” and “warfare,” to convey the psychological effect on victims. The use of the adverb “shamefully” conveys the author’s moral indictment of such behavior.

“Psychopaths consider the rules and expectations of society inconvenient and unreasonable, impediments to the behavioral expression of their inclinations and wishes. They make their own rules, both as children and as adults.”

Examining the characteristics of antisocial behavior in psychopaths, Hare explains that societal norms or expectations do not modulate their actions. Instead, their behavior is solely prompted by fulfilling their egotistical desires and cravings. The author emphasizes how this attitude threatens the cooperative foundations on which society is based.

“Socialization—through parenting, schooling, social experiences, religious training, and so forth—helps to create a system of beliefs, attitudes, and personal standards that determine how we interact with the world around us. Socialization also contributes to the formation of what most people call their conscience, the pesky inner voice that helps us to resist temptation and to feel guilty when we don’t.”

Hare explains how most people undergo a socialization process during their childhood and adolescence. Children naturally absorb and internalize the moral and social codes of society. This creates what is commonly thought of as a “conscience”—the “inner voice” that regulates human behavior. However, in psychopaths, the socialization process is ineffective, explaining their unregulated and antisocial behavior.

“In psychopaths, the links between prohibited acts and anxiety are weak, and the threat of punishment fails to deter them. Perhaps for this reason, Jeffrey’s record of arrests and convictions looked like the criminal history of an amnesiac: No punishment ever had the slightest effect in dissuading him from gratifying his impulses.”

Hare explores a further factor in the antisocial behavior of psychopaths—their shallow affect. Unlike most people, psychopaths do not experience intense fear or anxiety and consequently do not worry about the consequences of their actions. This phenomenon explains the high rate of recidivism in psychopathic offenders. In the case of Jeffrey, the author figuratively compares his inability to learn from previous prison sentences to the behavior of “an amnesiac.”

“Jeffrey saw in Elyse not a companion but rather a ‘connection’—a supplier of shelter, clothing, food, money, recreation, and sexual gratification. The consequences to her of his actions didn’t enter his consciousness. When it became clear that he’d squeezed all he could out of his association with her, he simply moved on to another source of goodies.”

The author highlights the predatory and parasitic nature of psychopathy in Jeffrey’s relationship with Elyse. Jeffrey’s remorselessness and lack of empathy for Elyse are emphasized as he perceives her as a resource to be exploited and then dispensed with. Throughout the book, Hare underscores the psychological and economic harm caused to individuals who unwittingly enter into personal relationships with psychopaths.

“The public’s fascination with the smooth con artist and the cold-blooded killer, unbounded by the dictates of society and conscience, has never been stronger. Goodfellas, Misery, Pacific Heights, Sleeping with the Enemy, In Broad Daylight, Love, Lies, and Murder, Small Sacrifices, Cape Fear, In a Child’s Name, and the particularly explicit chiller The Silence of the Lambs, are just a few of the most popular movies at this writing. True and re-enacted crime shows, such as Hard Copy, A Current Affair, and America’s Most Wanted, are now a television staple.”

Here, the author explores how the public’s fascination with the dark side of human nature is reflected in the popularity of movies and docudramas about psychopaths. Hare suggests that this impulse borders on an unhealthy celebration of the psychological disorder.

“The truth is, the personality structure of the psychopath spells trouble for the rest of us. Just as the great white shark is a natural killing machine, psychopaths naturally slip into the role of criminal. Their readiness to take advantage of any situation that arises, combined with their lack of the internal controls we know as conscience, creates a potent formula for crime.”

Hare argues that the character traits and antisocial inclinations of psychopaths result in a natural propensity toward criminality. The analogy of a great white shark’s instinctive drive to kill underscores the author’s argument that psychopathy is a largely biological or genetic condition. The allusion to these cold-eyed aquatic predators also evokes the lack of empathy and the shallow affect of psychopaths.

“Even experienced and case-hardened professionals find it unnerving when they see a psychopath’s reaction to a gut-wrenching event or listen to him or her casually describe a brutal offense as if an apple had been peeled or a fish gutted.”

Exploring psychopathy, Hare explains that the traits of remorseless and shallow affect are often evident in the aftermath of violent offenses. Psychopaths frequently appear unnaturally calm after committing horrific crimes, and their accounts of events display little emotion.

“Perhaps the scariest aspect of psychopathic violence is the influence it has on the nature of violence in our urban centers. Muggings, drug deals gone bad, ‘wildings,’ aggressive panhandling, gang activities, ‘swarming,’ and attacks on designated target groups such as gays usually involve the dispassionate or unprovoked use of violence against strangers or victims of convenience. One of the models of this new wave of violence is the psychopathic thug portrayed in movies and television: ‘Nothing personal,’ he says as he goes about his business of violent self-indulgence.”

Throughout Without Conscience, the author critiques contemporary society for providing an environment in which psychopaths can conceal themselves and even thrive. Here, Hare suggests that the remorseless psychopath has become a cult figure in popular culture. The rise in certain types of violent urban crime reflects this glamorization.

“At the very least, the story is a graphic morality tale about a breed of predators whose charming demeanor and anemic conscience grease the way for fleecing institutions and people—for what is euphemistically called white-collar crime. They have charming smiles on their faces and a trustworthy tone to their voices, but never—and this is a guarantee—do they wear warning bells around their necks.”

Hare presents John Grambling Jr. as a classic example of a psychopathic white-collar criminal. Defrauding banks and his own family members of millions of dollars, Grambling caused economic harm to individuals and society. Hare acknowledges that white-collar psychopaths use charm and deceit rather than violence to meet their selfish desires. However, he argues that the term “white-collar crime” and the relatively light sentences such criminals receive do not accurately reflect the severity of these offenses.

“These individuals are every bit as egocentric, callous and manipulative as the average criminal psychopath; however, their intelligence, family background, social skills, and circumstances permit them to construct a façade of normalcy and to get what they want with relative impunity.”

Here, the author describes subcriminals, a category of psychopaths he distinguishes from violent and white-collar criminals only by their evasion of justice. Hare implies that all psychopaths exhibit criminal or unethical behavior. Subcriminals often either exploit legal loopholes or avoid prosecution due to their success in deceiving others. The author suggests that politics is a favored environment of the subcriminal.

What interested Babiak most about this case was the fact that while those closest to him were convinced of Dave’s manipulations, irresponsibility, and lack of integrity, those higher up in the organization had been convinced—by Dave—of his management talent and potential. Despite clear evidence of dishonesty, they were still ‘charmed’ by him. His ranting and raving behavior were excused as part of his creative, almost artistic, bent, while his aggression and backbiting were seen by those people as ambition.

The case study of Dave illustrates Hare’s argument that psychopaths often flourish in the corporate world. Paul Babiak’s investigation into Dave’s behavior revealed numerous examples of dishonesty, irresponsibility, unprofessionalism, breaching of ethics, and abusive behavior toward his coworkers. However, despite this evidence, Dave’s superiors remained convinced of his professional potential. Dave’s case demonstrates how the ruthless and manipulative traits of psychopathy are often seen as attributes in corporate culture.

“Psychopaths may play mental Scrabble, but they do sometimes do it badly because they fail to integrate the pieces into a coherent whole; their truth line is fragmented and patchy, at best.”

Elaborating on psychopathy, Hare outlines the impaired linguistic control many psychopaths exhibit. The author explains how the narratives they construct are often contradictory and inconsistent. The analogy of arranging Scrabble tiles but failing to create a word reflects the psychopath’s confused and inefficient linguistic processing.

“Society runs on trust, and we ordinarily pay more attention to what someone says than to the accompanying nonverbal behavior—hand gestures, facial movements, smiles, eye contact. However, when the speaker is attractive and gives a really impressive nonverbal performance, the effect can be reversed—we watch the show and pay little attention to what is said.”

Here, Hare explains psychopaths’ ability to manipulate and convince others despite inconsistencies in their stories that should act as red flags. Psychopaths frequently use distracting gestures or body language, diverting the listener from focusing on the content of their speech too intently. Consequently, the author warns readers to concentrate on what new acquaintances say rather than how they appear.

“Most of the children who end up as adult psychopaths come to the attention of teachers and counselors at a very early age, and it is essential that these professionals understand the nature of the problem they are faced with. If intervention is to have any chance of succeeding, it will have to occur early in childhood. By adolescence, the chances of changing the behavioral patterns of the budding psychopath are slim.”

Hare explores The Challenges of Diagnosing and Managing Psychopathy, as he states that the early traits of psychopathy are evident in most psychopaths at pre-school age. However, medical professionals are reluctant to diagnose the disorder due to the stigma attached to this label. While the author acknowledges that psychopathy has “pejorative” connotations, he insists that early diagnosis of the disorder is imperative to intervene in behaviors.

“To use a simple analogy, the potter is instrumental in molding pottery from clay (nurture), but the characteristics of the pottery also depend on the sort of clay available (nature).”

In discussing the cause of psychopathy, Hare addresses the nature versus nurture debate. His analogy of molding clay conveys the author’s belief that psychopathy is a largely biological condition, but the nature of its expression can be influenced by upbringing and environment. However, Hare adds the caveat that psychopathic “clay” is a particularly difficult material for a “potter” shape.

“If, as I believe, our society is moving in the direction of permitting, reinforcing, and in some instances actually valuing some of the traits listed in the Psychopathy Checklist—traits such as impulsivity, irresponsibility, lack of remorse, and so on—our schools may be evolving into microcosms of a ‘camouflage society,’ where true psychopaths can hide out, pursuing their destructive, self-gratifying ways and endangering the general student population.”

Hare continues to critique society’s role in rewarding psychopaths, introducing his concept of a “camouflage society.” The author warns of a social crisis as, instead of managing the impact of psychopaths, society offers a cultural environment where they can hide and flourish.

“Like the top-of-the-head diagnosis furthered by ‘Dr. Death’ […] the long-distance diagnosis of public figures, even by experienced diagnosticians, can easily become a parody of professional procedure. The result can be a form of glorified gossip, lent credence not by the facts but merely by the expert’s credentials.”

Hare emphasizes the dangers not only of failing to diagnose psychopathy but also of misdiagnosing the disorder. Throughout the book, he underlines the importance of a thorough clinical assessment of subjects through the methodical use of his Psychopathy Checklist. The author uses the example of Dr. James Grigson as a cautionary tale. The Texan psychiatrist became known as “Dr. Death,” as his flawed assessment of offenders as psychopaths led to 69 prisoners receiving the death sentence.

“To elaborate, psychopaths are generally well satisfied with themselves and with their inner landscape, bleak as it may seem to outside observers. They see nothing wrong with themselves, experience little personal distress, and find their behavior rational, rewarding, and satisfying; they never look back with regret or forward with concern. They perceive themselves as superior beings in a hostile, dog-eat-dog world in which others are competitors for power and resources.”

The author addresses the challenges of treating psychopathy as he explains why traditional therapies prove ineffective. Hare explains that successful therapy requires the patient to actively engage with the process, gain insight into themselves, and, most importantly, want to change. Psychopaths are incapable of meaningful inner reflection and see no benefit in changing behaviors they find enjoyable and rewarding.

“Psychopaths are found in every segment of society, and there is a good chance that eventually you will have a painful or humiliating encounter with one. Your best defense is to understand the nature of these human predators.”

In this direct address to the reader, Hare advises that the best way of protecting oneself from psychopaths is to be conversant with their traits and behaviors. In describing psychopaths as “human predators,” the author reiterates the danger they represent. He also underlines the prevalence of psychopaths, suggesting that most readers are likely to encounter one.

“To a large extent, the personalities of psychopaths are ‘carved in stone.’ There is little likelihood that anything you do will produce fundamental, sustained changes in how they see themselves or others. They may promise to change and may even show short-term improvements in their behavior, but in most cases you will face years of disappointment if you believe that permanent changes for the better have occurred. Although some psychopaths do ‘mellow’ a bit with age, and as a consequence become somewhat easier to live with, in most cases they remain what they always have been.” 

Hare offers a bleak prognosis for any individual in a personal relationship with a psychopath. The intractable nature of psychopathic personality traits is underlined by his assertion that their characteristics are “carved in stone.” Psychopaths are unlikely to want to change and are incapable of doing so in any meaningful way.