Eric Harris quote about psychopathy

He was most definitely NOT a sociopath. Anyone that thinks otherwise is a fucking idiot. He would write about how he's been avoiding his family so it will be easier for them when they die, and in the basement tapes he told his family he was sorry and not to blame themselves and it's not there fault, would write about how he was insecure, especially around girls, and would write about how he was bitter that people wouldn't give him a chance and hangout with him because they perceived him as weird. That is NOT a sociopath. A sociopath has no empathy for anyone and regards themselves as higher than everyone and people as objects. He was even taking medication for depression. You want an example of a sociopath, ted bundy is one.

Ted Bundy, who worked at a crisis centre (suicide hotline, basically), saved a three year old boy from drowning, tried helping in catching the Green River Killer, successfully chased down a purse-thief in a mall and returned the purse to the owner and such?

You see, the "but s/he did this and that right, and he was caring towards this and that person" argument can go for almost all of these high profile murderers. Columbine, by far and large is not unique in this regard; in fact most people who study other crimes in the tcc can tell you: the "was s/he a psychopath/sociopath?" conundrum is present for the vast majority of discussions regarding other criminals being discussed.

Based on all of those discussions alone, I'm banking on yes, Eric Harris (and Dylan Klebold) were psychopaths. But psychopathy, in my personal opinion, seems to be a gradient rather than a yes or no question. The question isn't whether Bundy was a monster, or Eric was a monster: they are murderers who unleashed wanton cruelty, and by default, monsters they are. The question is just how much. Not as exciting, I know.

And yes, Bundy was, indeed, a psychopath. We know, because he killed people, and delighted in their suffering. Just like Eric and Dylan did.

When you end up murdering (on purpose, and not in the heat of the moment) and you love it, then yes, something is really wrong with you.  

Also, may I politely ask you not to refer to anyone as a "f-king idiot" just because their opinion happens to differ from yours? It makes people reconsider whether to participate in thoughtful discussions with you.

Holloka wrote:

Ted Bundy, who worked at a crisis centre (suicide hotline, basically), saved a three year old boy from drowning, tried helping in catching the Green River Killer, successfully chased down a purse-thief in a mall and returned the purse to the owner and such?

You see, the "but s/he did this and that right, and he was caring towards this and that person" argument can go for almost all of these high profile murderers. Columbine, by far and large is not unique in this regard; in fact most people who study other crimes in the tcc can tell you: the "was s/he a psychopath/sociopath?" conundrum is present for the vast majority of discussions regarding other criminals being discussed.

Based on all of those discussions alone, I'm banking on yes, Eric Harris (and Dylan Klebold) were psychopaths. But psychopathy, in my personal opinion, seems to be a gradient rather than a yes or no question. The question isn't whether Bundy was a monster, or Eric was a monster: they are murderers who unleashed wanton cruelty, and by default, monsters they are. The question is just how much. Not as exciting, I know.

And yes, Bundy was, indeed, a psychopath. We know, because he killed people, and delighted in their suffering. Just like Eric and Dylan did.

When you end up murdering (on purpose, and not in the heat of the moment) and you love it, then yes, something is really wrong with you.  

Also, may I politely ask you not to refer to anyone as a "f-king idiot" just because their opinion happens to differ from yours? It makes people reconsider whether to participate in thoughtful discussions with you.

This needed to be said. There are too many top commenters on here who are steadfast in the belief that Eric was most definitely not a psychopath (Dylan never even enters the conversation). I think that's a closed minded and presumptuous position to say the least. At least grant that psychopathy and sociopathy are better viewed as a spectrum rather than stark black and white. With that said, Eric and Dylan committed premeditated murder of numerous innocent strangers. That pushes them further along the spectrum.

I haven't read Eric's journal for awhile and have only a basic understanding of psychology from high school, so excuse me if I get some stuff stumbled.
I'm not going to put a divination "yes" or "no" on him being a psychopath, but simply my take on what I've noticed.
I think Eric had a lot going on inside of him with crazy ups and downs, as well as time with emotion or a complete disconnect from them. As stated above, with his family background, father's military career, and his high school experience- Eric was ground to a nub of a person. I see him as being relatively normal up until probably middle school and high school. You might also take into account how kids were raised and the areas he grew up in, but I'm not saying this is 100% the reason as to why he was the person he was. It could have a bit of an effect though.
As it was stated above, Eric had a caring family, but was probably a bit strict with his father. I can probably see as to how he might became a person to bottle up emotion more than show it. If I'm correct, he grew up primarily in the mid-west which, from experience, is more conservative and people can be brutal. This with a mix of bottled emotions and the possible bullying as he entered adolescence can probably explain his anger at a younger age. Especially with some of the things Sue said in her book about both him and Dylan in middle school (I think it was).
Enter high school and he's completely faced with more.
With trying to probably follow in his father/brother's footsteps, the lack of respect he got from people a school because of his deformity (and how people, specially girls, treated him), his height, weight, and some of the movie or game characters he idolized- he shrunk into himself as a person. I feel this is evident from the videos of him and his body language. He doesn't seem confident no matter how much he tries to show he has. But he was also described as relatively nice in school. Yes he could have been lying but I don't really think so. As stated above as well, it seems as though he took on his persona or alter ego of "Rebel" and used it as his expresser. It was said before, he started this journal around the time of the creation of the NBK planning. At this point, he had snapped and wanted the be Reb. He wanted the infamy of what would become Columbine. So he wrote a shock value journal that he wanted to be read and found. I mean, he directly states why and what he wanted people to know about the massacre. I do think there is real emotion mixed into it, thus a lot of the contradictions in it. I do think a lot of both journals also haven't been released because they seem too short and choppy. We're only getting bits.
But I do also know this. You can only take so much before snapping. I know from my own experiences that there were times in high school that I completely disconnected from reality and went on my own rampage. I didn't care about anything or anyone anymore until something brought me back to reality and probably resulted in some kind of breakdown and I think this can explain both Eric and Dylan in the last month or so before 4/20.
Wasn't there something saying that on part of the basement tapes that Eric is crying in his car because he was thinking about something? I don't think Eric lacked emotion. I think he simply sunk back and forth between feeling nothing and something.
When the shooting actually did happen. I think he completely snapped and instead of wanted to be the persona of "Reb", he became it. Thus why he went though with everything and just didn't care anymore. Wanted to fulfill his desire.
I think this happened to both Dylan and Eric and why they were so dead set at this point of doing it and why nothing could stop them, if not motivate them more. They just stopped caring.

Sorry this was a bit long or confusing, I just tried to explain the best I could my view of Eric.

thenight_watchman wrote:

I haven't read Eric's journal for awhile and have only a basic understanding of psychology from high school, so excuse me if I get some stuff stumbled.
I'm not going to put a divination "yes" or "no" on him being a psychopath, but simply my take on what I've noticed.
I think Eric had a lot going on inside of him with crazy ups and downs, as well as time with emotion or a complete disconnect from them. As stated above, with his family background, father's military career, and his high school experience- Eric was ground to a nub of a person. I see him as being relatively normal up until probably middle school and high school. You might also take into account how kids were raised and the areas he grew up in, but I'm not saying this is 100% the reason as to why he was the person he was. It could have a bit of an effect though.
As it was stated above, Eric had a caring family, but was probably a bit strict with his father. I can probably see as to how he might became a person to bottle up emotion more than show it. If I'm correct, he grew up primarily in the mid-west which, from experience, is more conservative and people can be brutal. This with a mix of bottled emotions and the possible bullying as he entered adolescence can probably explain his anger at a younger age. Especially with some of the things Sue said in her book about both him and Dylan in middle school (I think it was).
Enter high school and he's completely faced with more.
With trying to probably follow in his father/brother's footsteps, the lack of respect he got from people a school because of his deformity (and how people, specially girls, treated him), his height, weight, and some of the movie or game characters he idolized- he shrunk into himself as a person. I feel this is evident from the videos of him and his body language. He doesn't seem confident no matter how much he tries to show he has. But he was also described as relatively nice in school. Yes he could have been lying but I don't really think so. As stated above as well, it seems as though he took on his persona or alter ego of "Rebel" and used it as his expresser. It was said before, he started this journal around the time of the creation of the NBK planning. At this point, he had snapped and wanted the be Reb. He wanted the infamy of what would become Columbine. So he wrote a shock value journal that he wanted to be read and found. I mean, he directly states why and what he wanted people to know about the massacre. I do think there is real emotion mixed into it, thus a lot of the contradictions in it. I do think a lot of both journals also haven't been released because they seem too short and choppy. We're only getting bits.
But I do also know this. You can only take so much before snapping. I know from my own experiences that there were times in high school that I completely disconnected from reality and went on my own rampage. I didn't care about anything or anyone anymore until something brought me back to reality and probably resulted in some kind of breakdown and I think this can explain both Eric and Dylan in the last month or so before 4/20.
Wasn't there something saying that on part of the basement tapes that Eric is crying in his car because he was thinking about something? I don't think Eric lacked emotion. I think he simply sunk back and forth between feeling nothing and something.
When the shooting actually did happen. I think he completely snapped and instead of wanted to be the persona of "Reb", he became it. Thus why he went though with everything and just didn't care anymore. Wanted to fulfill his desire.
I think this happened to both Dylan and Eric and why they were so dead set at this point of doing it and why nothing could stop them, if not motivate them more. They just stopped caring.

Sorry this was a bit long or confusing, I just tried to explain the best I could my view of Eric.  

Yes. Eric was crying thinking about his friends he would never get to see again.

Lizpuff wrote:

Yes.  Eric was crying thinking about his friends he would never get to see again.

Or he was acting. None of us have seen the video. We should petition Randy Brown.

As much as no one wants to admit, the psychopathy theory explains a lot. Eric planned a massacre for a year and then carried it out. He didn't "snap." Also, there are millions of young people who suffer far greater atrocities and never go on to hurt anyone. Consider Eric's strict father, moving around as a child, chest deformity, etc. against kids who are molested, beaten, starved, neglected, raised on the streets in gang cultures, raised in the midst of major military conflicts, etc. and Eric's problems, I'm sorry to say, are small potatoes.

It's easy to go down the Columbine rabbit hole and deconstruct and over analyze everything we know about E&D. But let's not get lost in our own narratives and lose perspective. I, for one, wish I had a mother who was half the woman Sue Klebold was/is. There are millions of people who can list their problems alongside E&D's and make them look like spoiled, attention seeking brats.

runreilly wrote:

and Eric's problems, I'm sorry to say, are small potatoes.

Whoa whoa whoa hold up, wait a minute, two seconds sweetie.

YOU cannot tell another person how big or small their problems which THEY deem are problems is. It is what YOU think and YOUR perspective but in THEIR MINDS, it can be huge, struggling and suffering to them. it may be hard for YOU to grasp that but as long as to THEM it is hurting them, they have the right to feel that they are miserable.

CLEARLY what he went through was bad enough for him as he decided he hated himself and was tired the world that he killed everyone else.

This is in line with people who try to compare issues and try to tell others how to feel and that other people have it worst. No no. If I think my issues are destroying me, that's how I feel.

And I strongly believe he cried and was immensely upset that he lost his childhood friends. If they didn't mean anything to him he wouldn't be writing about them, missing them greatly. I think if he never moved and grew up with them he would be happy and get by normally.

Blame that on Wayne Harris, apparently he didn't care enough about how his son felt  moving to a different state.

bradt93 wrote:

Blame that on Wayne Harris, apparently he didn't care enough about how his son felt  moving to a different state.

I think he now regrets it... But Eric had made new friends. Teenagers don't really want to share their problems with parents. And many on the surface seem not so bad. Parents might think the family is well settled in the new place.

shades wrote:

runreilly wrote:

and Eric's problems, I'm sorry to say, are small potatoes.

Whoa whoa whoa hold up, wait a minute, two seconds sweetie.

YOU cannot tell another person how big or small their problems which THEY deem are problems is. It is what YOU think and YOUR perspective but in THEIR MINDS, it can be huge, struggling and suffering to them. it may be hard for YOU to grasp that but as long as to THEM it is hurting them, they have the right to feel that they are miserable.

CLEARLY what he went through was bad enough for him as he decided he hated himself and was tired the world that he killed everyone else.

This is in line with people who try to compare issues and try to tell others how to feel and that other people have it worst. No no. If I think my issues are destroying me, that's how I feel.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] I knew this response was coming. It's always the same. 'People are affected by things differently.' 'People interpret things differently.' This is a shallow, post-modernist response and can be used in almost every situation. Taken to its logical extent it's utterly ridiculous and carries so little information that one has to wonder why it needs constant restating. It also stifles any real analysis or comparison. For instance, we can't compare Eric Harris and his concave chest to a teenager who watched in horror as his family was mutilated in Auschwitz because 'their perspectives.' And we'll conveniently ignore the numbers. The only thing we are left with are conjecture and imagination, but not the sort of imagination that entertains the possibility that Eric was actually far along on the psychopath spectrum. That might hurt our feelings for him. And no one had better call his grievances "small potatoes!"

At least acknowledge that even the most exhaustive list of E&D's problems and negative experiences pale in comparison to hundreds of millions of teenagers around the world. This is part of what makes them so enigmatic. It's incredibly rare that low self esteem results in mass murder. It does happen, and we're usually quick to conclude that the perpetrators might have had some serious psychological issues. We look into it objectively and ask the uncomfortable questions.

I think you're consumed by Columbine to the extent that perhaps it clouds your judgement. It seems you're ready and willing to victimize E&D and give the benefit of doubt whenever possible. I doubt you have such charitable views for people like Jim Jones and Omar Mateen.

And I'll just say it so you don't have to: Yes, it's possible that trauma from bullying, low self esteem, and a chest deformity drove Eric to extensively plan and execute mass murder. A mass murder so callous and unsympathetic that it actually included a very large number of friends and acquaintances.

shades wrote:

YOU cannot tell another person how big or small their problems which THEY deem are problems is. It is what YOU think and YOUR perspective but in THEIR MINDS, it can be huge, struggling and suffering to them. it may be hard for YOU to grasp that but as long as to THEM it is hurting them, they have the right to feel that they are miserable.

You're missing the part where they tried to blow up the school and parking lots.  It's kind of an important part, but you missed it while you were busy sticking up for E&D's rights.

Ya know, I've never cared much for ketchup.  In fact, I'm going to blow up the next restaurant that serves me ketchup, even if friends and family work there.  Will you be there to surmise that this was the work of ketchup-induced trauma?  Will you be calling out people who marginalize my strong feelings against ketchup?  Will you flatly reject any notion of possible psychopathic tendencies?

shades wrote:

And I strongly believe he cried and was immensely upset that he lost his childhood friends. If they didn't mean anything to him he wouldn't be writing about them, missing them greatly. I think if he never moved and grew up with them he would be happy and get by normally.

Sounds like the Eric Harris of Shades' imagination. He literally ruined the lives of his friends and family. He didn't have to do this. If cared about his parents or brother (or anyone else), he could have settled for shooting himself. I think his actions show a complete lack of care for anyone but himself.

runreilly wrote:

shades wrote:

runreilly wrote:

and Eric's problems, I'm sorry to say, are small potatoes.

Whoa whoa whoa hold up, wait a minute, two seconds sweetie.

YOU cannot tell another person how big or small their problems which THEY deem are problems is. It is what YOU think and YOUR perspective but in THEIR MINDS, it can be huge, struggling and suffering to them. it may be hard for YOU to grasp that but as long as to THEM it is hurting them, they have the right to feel that they are miserable.

CLEARLY what he went through was bad enough for him as he decided he hated himself and was tired the world that he killed everyone else.

This is in line with people who try to compare issues and try to tell others how to feel and that other people have it worst. No no. If I think my issues are destroying me, that's how I feel.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] I knew this response was coming.  It's always the same. 'People are affected by things differently.'  'People interpret things differently.'  This is a shallow, post-modernist response and can be used in almost every situation.  Taken to its logical extent it's utterly ridiculous and carries so little information that one has to wonder why it needs constant restating.  It also stifles any real analysis or comparison.  For instance, we can't compare Eric Harris and his concave chest to a teenager who watched in horror as his family was mutilated in Auschwitz because 'their perspectives.'  And we'll conveniently ignore the numbers.  The only thing we are left with are conjecture and imagination, but not the sort of imagination that entertains the possibility that Eric was actually far along on the psychopath spectrum.  That might hurt our feelings for him.  And no one had better call his grievances "small potatoes!"  

At least acknowledge that even the most exhaustive list of E&D's problems and negative experiences pale in comparison to hundreds of millions of teenagers around the world.  This is part of what makes them so enigmatic.  It's incredibly rare that low self esteem results in mass murder.  It does happen, and we're usually quick to conclude that the perpetrators might have had some serious psychological issues.  We look into it objectively and ask the uncomfortable questions.

I think you're consumed by Columbine to the extent that perhaps it clouds your judgement.  It seems you're ready and willing to victimize E&D and give the benefit of doubt whenever possible.  I doubt you have such charitable views for people like Jim Jones and Omar Mateen.

And I'll just say it so you don't have to:  Yes, it's possible that trauma from bullying, low self esteem, and a chest deformity drove Eric to extensively plan and execute mass murder.  A mass murder so callous and unsympathetic that it actually included a very large number of friends and acquaintances.  

The fact that people are affected differently by the same things certainly has meaning. An individual's perception of the world can only be filtered through the lens of their personality which is largely a result of their previous life experiences. It is an important point even if it is not an explanation. You see Eric's problems as small potatoes and in comparison to someone living in a concentration camp, this is true. That is irrelevant. When it comes to emotion, perception is everything. Did Dylan really have a good reason to feel suicidally depressed and isolated with his privileged upbringing, loving parents, several close friends and a brother who cared about him? Maybe not. I don't think you would deny that Dylan's perception of his situation was more important than the reality.

Telling a depressed person to "think of the starving children in Africa!" will rarely make them feel less depressed because emotional disorders are not logical or rational. For a healthy and functional person, this may have an effect but we must develop skills to deal with emotional regulation and neither Eric nor Dylan had many healthy coping mechanisms. Eric generally held back his anger, fantasizing about revenge, ranting on the internet or in his journal until he blew up and punched walls. Dylan withdrew, spending most of his time in his room while he got drunk and self-harmed. Both of them were getting into physical and verbal confrontations and acting out in antisocial ways by their late teens. Neither one knew how to deal with their "small potatoes."

Some shooters have experienced severe trauma but not all of them, and the majority of traumatized people do not commit a mass shooting so this would not be an explanation in itself. The experts don't believe psychopathy was involved in Dylan's case so if you take their assessment as truth, then we already know that it's possible, despite living an ostensibly comfortable life, for perceived trauma, self-esteem issues and emotional problems to lead to mass murder.

Earlier in the thread you pointed to the fact that Eric planned for a year before he killed as proof of psychopathic behavior. By that logic, any killer that does not act in the heat of the moment is a psychopath and we know that this is not true. We know that Dylan did not snap either. He did the same thing as Eric and Eric actually had several issues that Dylan did not (multiple moves and having to leave friendships behind, physical deformity and short stature making him a target for bullies) so this is an inadequate evaluation. I think that if you want to prove that Eric is a psychopath, you need much more than "he didn't have it so bad" and "he planned to kill for a long time." I think that the majority of people who disagree with the psychopath assessment would argue that Eric was definitely dysfunctional in some way, but there are other explanations for mass murder. I don't know whether Eric was a psychopath or not but you have not provided evidence to support your position.

Thank you [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

runreilly wrote:

Sounds like the Eric Harris of Shades' imagination.

Nope.

and what does him ending up committing homicide afterwards have anything to do with the fact that he missed his childhood friends?..

I just wonder if Eric's parents ever told him before all this happened, "We love you Eric" them saying those 4 words could've gone a long way. Wayne called his own son a "psycho" I know he did a horrendous thing, but I just wonder what went on in that household prior to the shooting?

It didn't seem to help Dylan.

From Sue's book:

One of the most painful questions people ask suicide loss survivors is whether or not we ever hugged our kids. The question hurts, not only for the obvious reasons (only thousands of times; what kind of mother doesn’t hug her kid?) but, in my case, because of a specific incident—indeed, a specific hug—that took place in the last two weeks of Dylan’s life. One afternoon we passed each other in the hallway at the foot of the stairs. Spontaneously, I threw my arms around him.

“I love you so much,” I told him. “You are such a wonderful person, and Dad and I are so proud of you.” He rested his left hand gently on my back, barely touching me. With the jokingly haughty air we sometimes used to thank each other for elaborate and ridiculous compliments, he thanked me. But I didn’t want him to make a joke of this, which I meant with all my heart, and so I took his thin jawbone in both of my hands and looked directly into his eyes.

“No kidding around, Dylan: I mean it. I love you so much. You are a wonderful person, and Dad and I are proud of you.”

He looked down, embarrassed, and whispered his thanks.

For years, I replayed this scene in my mind. Afraid that it would become distorted through repetition, I wrote it down. I can see it like a movie now, two figures in the hallway, his hand on the small of my back, me reaching up to hold his face. The memory of that hug is one of the most painful I hold—and the knowledge that, to this day, I have no idea what on earth Dylan could possibly have been thinking.

Glad to know my depression isn't real because I didn't grow up in a concentration camp!

That excerpt from Sue is so painful and sad. I feel for her.

I thought it was interesting that the exchange between Dylan and his mom took place 2 weeks before the shooting.

Obviously, it did not have any effect on Dylan's decision to go through with the shooting.

sscc wrote:

I don't know whether Eric was a psychopath or not but you have not provided evidence to support your position.

When did this become my position?  I simply entertain the possibility.  I'm willing to imagine it as a spectrum on which people can be further along than others.  Some others on this forum are utterly convinced that Eric was not.  That's the closed-minded position at least from what I have read on here. Arguments such as "I have a gut feeling" and "I know in my heart" are inadequate.  E&D apologetics are nauseating.  The general lack of apologetics and fangirl/fanboy talk are what make this forum better than the rest (not to mention the knowledge many members have are very impressive and helpful).  

E&D were a special kind of 'depressed and angry.'  They weren't just 'suicidal' and I think we should agree that 'revenge seeking' is a particularly weak.  No one can point out any motivation for slaughtering Kyle Velasquez or Daniel Mauser without extrapolating out into the stratosphere (i.e. "They wanted to kill the school").  

They meticulously planned to kill hundreds of innocent people and we're lucky they failed.  It should be fair to say that their perceptions of reality were filtered through disgusting and warped personalities.  Broken personalities.  Personalities that lacked dignity and empathy to an astonishing degree.

I find it amazing that some on here can regularly pontificate about the positive personality traits of E&D... but call them enigmatic, entertain the notion that psychopathy was a factor, and call their problems "small potatoes" and certain members are triggered.  

Everyone on here is asking the same question:  Why did they do it?  An honest conversation about psychopathy would be interesting and shouldn't be shrugged off with a roll of the eyes because of Fuselier and Cullen.

runreilly wrote:

sscc wrote:

I don't know whether Eric was a psychopath or not but you have not provided evidence to support your position.

When did this become my position?  I simply entertain the possibility.  I'm willing to imagine it as a spectrum on which people can be further along than others.  Some others on this forum are utterly convinced that Eric was not.  That's the closed-minded position at least from what I have read on here.  Arguments such as "I have a gut feeling" and "I know in my heart" are inadequate.  E&D apologetics are nauseating.  The general lack of apologetics and fangirl/fanboy talk are what make this forum better than the rest (not to mention the knowledge many members have are very impressive and helpful).  

E&D were a special kind of 'depressed and angry.'  They weren't just 'suicidal' and I think we should agree that 'revenge seeking' is a particularly weak.  No one can point out any motivation for slaughtering Kyle Velasquez or Daniel Mauser without extrapolating out into the stratosphere (i.e. "They wanted to kill the school").  

They meticulously planned to kill hundreds of innocent people and we're lucky they failed.  It should be fair to say that their perceptions of reality were filtered through disgusting and warped personalities.  Broken personalities.  Personalities that lacked dignity and empathy to an astonishing degree.

I find it amazing that some on here can regularly pontificate about the positive personality traits of E&D... but call them enigmatic, entertain the notion that psychopathy was a factor, and call their problems "small potatoes" and certain members are triggered.  

Everyone on here is asking the same question:  Why did they do it?  An honest conversation about psychopathy would be interesting and shouldn't be shrugged off with a roll of the eyes because of Fuselier and Cullen.

If you think E&D were further along on the psychopath spectrum, then isn't it your position that they were psychopaths (or just Eric)? I rolled my eyes at Fuselier and Cullen in another post because in my opinion, they were close-minded about the situation. I don't think most of us on here are 100% certain that Eric wasn't a psychopath, because that would be silly, because none of us can really know for sure. I'd be open to an honest conversation about the possibility of psychopathy, but I also don't think "triggered" is the correct word to use with someone who disagrees with you, and who you call "close-minded".

In my opinion I think Eric just had enough of life to sum it up.

Guest wrote:

Most of Eric's journal seems like it was written FOR everyone to find and read

he even writes in his journal that so&so wont be able to read it as he'll be dead...so he was definitely writing knowing it would be found and act as his manifesto.

Quote :

He stated " I wish I was a fucking sociopath so I didn't have any remorse, but I do"

I think he is confusing "remorse" with another term, since remorse is something you feel after you've committed a bad deed. He seems to think that a sociopath is someone who shoots multiple strangers without any hesitation whatsoever. So I think that's what he felt at the time he wrote this line; hesitation.
That doesn't automatically mean that he can't be a psychopath/sociopath. Because killing, unless it's done in self-defense, is a highly unnatural act since we're programmed to survive as a species. Psychopaths/Sociopaths may have a warped way of thinking, but that doesn't mean that they lack human instincts altogether.

ColumbineIsInterestingAF wrote:

A sociopath has no empathy for anyone and regards themselves as higher than everyone and people as objects. He was even taking medication for depression. You want an example of a sociopath, ted bundy is one.

I am re-reading this comment thread, and I would like to point out a few things about psychopathy that are not apparent to the layman. First, psychopaths (people diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder) are capable of feeling emotions and empathy for close relatives; however, unlike the rest of us, they are able to switch off those emotions with ease when they commit a crime (the insula and cingulate cortex regions of the brain are responsible for emotions related to empathy--an fyi for those interested in brain science). Eric Harris' journal suggests that he could turn his emotions off when he needed to enact his plans. So, when he stated that he was keeping an emotional distance from his parents and friends in the basement tapes, he was referring of course, to his ability to suppress his empathy and compassion for them, even when he knew how heartbroken they would be after the massacre. That distance probably pushed him towards mass murder because he chose to turn his empathy off.

Glamazon wrote:

killing, unless it's done in self-defense, is a highly unnatural act since we're programmed to survive as a species.

I like this singular admission because of how thoroughly truthful it is. I think if more people understood this we'd come a lot farther in understanding what drives mass murderers and even killers in general. It's also a major reason I push back against the bullying narrative surrounding Columbine and generally tend to oppose simple answers for rampage killers in general - their actions are so past the norm for the vast majority of human beings that I think we have to go way beyond surface level explanations for their actions, like blaming a culture that allegedly glorifies violence or tarring the mentally ill by associating them with murderers. To actually get back at the topic on hand, this extends to Eric's alleged psychopathy too. Even Peter Langman, a proponent of the "psychopath" theory, admitted that this is only one aspect that goes towards understand Eric's mind and motivations, and that other factors must be taken into account.