Eric Harris quote about psychopathy

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

Do you think that he was lying?

"ll just go to some downtown area in some big ass city and blow up and shoot everything I can. Feel no remorse, no sense of shame"

"it's just another word like justice, sorry, pity, religion, faith, luck "



Or he wrote those cold quotes only for attention? Maybe because he felt that no one was sorry for him?

He was upset with the world and with good reason since he felt alone and rejected, why? well we weren't with him to see what he experienced with the people but something had to happen because no one write things like this just for attention, starting with the fact that no one was reading his stuff at the moment he wrote it and he didnt know for sure if someone really would.

I think you have to have an element of lack of remose when you get down and personal with your victims before you shoot them. Both Eric and Dylan would taunt some of their victims before shooting them. A person with remorse who is committing a spur of the moment act will probably just shoot people in quick succession before surrender or before shooting themselves. I used to think that Eric's care for animals was proof enough that he did not have phsycopathic tendancies, however then I remember that Ted Bundy loved dogs.

Most of Eric's journal seems like it was written FOR everyone to find and read. Note the differences between his and Dylan's journals. I don't believe it's ample proof that he's a psychopath, however. You can't diagnose someone as a psychopath when it's a theory and not an actual disorder. The DSM (Diagnostic & Statistics Manual), which is what psychiatrists use to diagnose patients, does not include psychopathy.

In Eric's journal, his writings portray what the media wanted: the perfect school shooter poster child who hated everything, everyone, and bragged about his plans to kill everyone in sight (which failed, in retrospect.) Meanwhile, Dylan's is pure angst. Not to call *all* of his problems "angsty", as he was possibly severely depressed. I doubt he even realized that someone would find it after he killed himself. He scarcely mentioned his plans for the massacre; just crushes, anger, sadness, and disappointment with his life. It was genuine, raw, incoherent and occasionally flat out strange.

I always wonder if Eric was hiding a lot of his true feelings, for the sake of building an image everyone would pore over after he died.

For starters, that's what we're doing. At least a little.

Lananas wrote:

Most of Eric's journal seems like it was written FOR everyone to find and read. Note the differences between his and Dylan's journals. I don't believe it's ample proof that he's a psychopath, however. You can't diagnose someone as a psychopath when it's a theory and not an actual disorder. The DSM (Diagnostic & Statistics Manual), which is what psychiatrists use to diagnose patients, does not include psychopathy.

In Eric's journal, his writings portray what the media wanted: the perfect school shooter poster child who hated everything, everyone, and bragged about his plans to kill everyone in sight (which failed, in retrospect.) Meanwhile, Dylan's is pure angst. Not to call *all* of his problems "angsty", as he was possibly severely depressed. I doubt he even realized that someone would find it after he killed himself. He scarcely mentioned his plans for the massacre; just crushes, anger, sadness, and disappointment with his life. It was genuine, raw, incoherent and occasionally flat out strange.

I always wonder if Eric was hiding a lot of his true feelings, for the sake of building an image everyone would pore over after he died.

For starters, that's what we're doing. At least a little.

Thats a good point, specially in the last two paragraphs. When you start a journal because you have too much things to express, it seems that you are writing to all the world like if all the world is reading you, many feelings and thoughs are not express or not very much at all because you are lazy to write often or you think about it once and forget it later, including the reason already mentioned in the beginning. What could be Eric's problem but it doesnt mean that he did it for attention, just Eric knew anyway, even though we have to remember that he started it when he started the massacre's plan or almost and both reasons (the attention and too much feelings around) might be valid. And I say now that both reasons because I couldnt ignore that Eric wanted to be practically famous after the massacre and many would want to read his writings like happen now.

For Eric his journal was the way to build an image of his alter ego Reb, He'd always wanted to be a tough guy with no remorse a true alpha male. Durnig his short life he didn't achive it so he figured out that he could do that through writing at least. The only entry where he showed his true face was the last from Aprill. So I don't get his journal seriously.

Remorse means you wish you hadn't done something.  You can't feel remorse and then go do it.

Psychopaths often feel "fleeting" emotions that are tiny compared to what a person with a conscience would feel.  The literature is clear about this.  My guess is that Eric was experiencing a "fleeting" indication of how a normal person might view Columbine, and it found it slightly uncomfortable (where a normal person would find it totally horrifying).

I'm sorry maybe I didn't exprees myself clearly, english is not my first language. It was a slip of the tongue.

MysteryMan wrote:

I'm sorry maybe I didn't exprees myself clearly, english is not my first language. It was a slip of the tongue.

Actually I understood what you meant very well but if you think that you didnt express clearly then you can try again with a longer explanation that I would like to read because your last post was interesting. I am not very agree with it but it can have a bit of sense too.

By this line of thinking ,is Eric a psychopath because he had these thoughts and feelings or because he acted on them to their full conclusion? Many angry , abused kids have had the same thoughts and feelings and looked forward to their revenge with glee, only to end up not going through with it for some reason. I don't think they all would qualify as psychopathic.

MysteryMan wrote:

I'm sorry maybe I didn't exprees myself clearly, english is not my first language. It was a slip of the tongue.

You expressed yourself perfectly well my friend.

I was just saying that I don't believe he had remorse. Many people say he did. But I don't believe it.

Your English is fine.

Thank you both for kind words. I'll try to elaborate my thoughts. At first I want to say I found Eric with some way familiar to me I share with him some kind of similar life experience. As we know Eric was raised up in house where his father was dominant and mother which was subordinate to her husband additionally he had a brother whom was a popular kid in school. I think he had not been taught how to express his feelings and in consequence he bottled them up. My father was working in an army too and I've had a similar problem with my emotional side. Maybe it's stupid what I say but I think that Eric was more sensitive than Dylan whom was out of touch with reality and didn't care about nothing and nobody. I see him also as a better liar than Eric. Eric tried to search his identity and be like his father and brother but he fault. When he realized than he had no chance to achive it he built his alter ego Reb and pretended to act like a tough guy. Those military clothes, music, videos, silly theory about natural selection and being above all mankind. When I watch videos with him I can see insecure kid with terrible body language. He was not coherent with himself hence I assume why so many girls turned him down because women have a better skills to "read" a body language and feel an affectation. I don't agree that he was a psychopath. It's a easy explanation and the way to shut the case. A problem is more complex but is hard to search an answer when so many evidences are not released.

lasttrain wrote:

MysteryMan wrote:

I'm sorry maybe I didn't exprees myself clearly, english is not my first language. It was a slip of the tongue.

You expressed yourself perfectly well my friend.

I was just saying that I don't believe he had remorse.  Many people say he did.  But I don't believe it.

Your English is fine.

I don't believe it to. I believe that both boys were very disappointed, not only for the bombs which failed, but for not feeling happier after the whole incident. I think they expected something big after killing people, I can't find other words for that.

The problem I have with this whole psychopath or not discussion, is that especially Eric committed suicide. in my opinion a real Psychopath acted more like Ted Bundy or Charles Manson, with taking the opportunity to brag for his actions. So I am always confuse about that.

Maybe Eric meant that he not only understands what he is doing, but can feel it. Like that, if I were a sociopath, I would not have suffered, but I also have feelings. I'm hurting you because you hurt me.

I just don't get why the teachers or no one else defended them why were being bullied. They probably felt lik noone cared about them enough to do that. I mean the principal and the teachers were a joke from what I read. I think that whole school was weird.

bradt93 wrote:

I just don't get why the teachers or no one else defended them why were being bullied. They probably felt lik  noone cared about them enough to do that. I mean the principal and the teachers were a joke from what I read. I think that whole school was weird.

Mr D. was and is a nice person. And you tend to forget they bullied others, one kid so bad he became afraid to come to school.

Yes, they did, but why did the principal let that bullying culture go on?

bradt93 wrote:

Yes, they did, but why did the principal let that bullying culture go on?

The only person who can really answer that is him. Although I know after the shooting he tried to be more aware of issues like bullying, but I don't know how long he kept up with it.

I'm not saying it's right but unfortunately bullying has been around in schools as long as schools have existed. I don't think it's possible to eliminate it completely. I think columbine's principal was more focused on the reputation of the school in the community. If bullying was ever brought to his attention he probably brushed it off as kids being kids. Maybe he didn't know how extreme it was. And a lot of times kids who are being bullied don't want to speak up about it out of fear that they'll be bullied worse for ratting people out.

Not trying to make excuses for him or anyone else, but if you personally don't see any (major) incidents of it and no one is reporting it to you, how can you try to fix it?

Mr.D may be a nice person but he was a horrible principal.He seemed to totally ignore the suffering of the unpopular students in the school.
And I found his denials after the shooting that the culture of his school or the administrations behavior had the slightest thing to do which it which I found irresponsible.His treatment of E &D's parents was reprehensible.
He just ignored them and never offered any sympathy or caring to them for their loss at all.

A person doesn't have to hit every "check point" on the DSM profile to be diagnosed with a certain disorder.  Nor do people display certain emotions with absolute consistency.

Eric is a classic sociopath, undeniable with any understanding of what the true qualifiers are.

CHS unfortunately is the classic example of an American school.  The food chain in life will always be dominated by the strong, wealthy and attractive.  In the case of the most shallow country in the world's existence, America just takes it to a whole new level.  It didn't take but a few years for CHS to revert to it's old ways.

Go to a 10 year high school reunion and you'll see that reality in the examples of the jock that is now a loser whose athletic prowess has run it's course and they no longer have that to rely upon.  The beauty queen who lost her looks.  If they don't have other qualities and lose the few they had, it's not a pretty situation.  Then you have the "under the radar" individuals who have found success based on being intelligent, possibly late bloomers etc.. that are the talk of the reunion for who they've become.

End of the day the winners are the strong, powerful and attractive.  The shame with E&D is that they eliminated themselves and were never able to blossom into a life that may have provided the joy and respect they so desired.

There is no way for a school to effectively manage bullying, it's a natural development of mankind that will exist in every scenario regardless of what structure is put in place.  Example being prisons and the Civil War.  In a so called controlled and mostly isolated environment, the prison system is run by the inmates and it's the most brutal example of power, strength and resources one will ever encounter.  The civil war example I include due to the separation from "English control" and the unity of those persecuted by the old country.  How long did it take for power and control instincts to put that unified group back at war with each other?

Sad reality, but a reality none the less.

columbine22 wrote:

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

Do you think that he  was lying?

"ll just go to some downtown area in some big ass city and blow up and shoot everything I can. Feel no remorse, no sense of shame"

"it's just another word like justice, sorry, pity, religion, faith, luck "

Dwayne Fuselier would say, "If you felt any kind of remorse, Eric, you wouldn't have done it." It's very difficult to argue that point. Let me give a brief example: Jill has an annoying dog. John lives next door to Jill and can't stand her dog's incessant barking. John hatches a plan to entice Jill's dog with dog treats laced in poison. But before he goes to execute the plan, John says that he wishes he wasn't a sick person, so that he would feel pity for the animal he about to poison. John executes the plan anyway. Do you believe John? Do you think he was remorseful?
Think about this scenario for a moment.

columbine22 wrote:

"ll just go to some downtown area in some big ass city and blow up and shoot everything I can. Feel no remorse, no sense of shame"

The last sentence is a piece of a KMFDM song. Maybe it's insignificant that these words were not originally written by Eric but maybe it is relevant.

KMFDM - Anarchy
Break my back
You won't break me
All is black
But I still see
Shut me down
Knock me to the floor
Shoot me up
Fuck me like a whore

Trapped under ice
Comfortably cold
I've gone as low as you can go
Feel no remorse
No sense of shame
Time's gonna wash away all pain

I made a God out of blood
Not superiority
I killed the king of deceit
Now I sleep in anarchy
Anarchy

Sacrifice to the cause
Turn your code into law
Compensate to validate the loss
You take a thief
Nail him to a cross

Gospel of rage
Faction of hate
Deviate from the absolute
Born of revenge
Raised on cement
Chaos created government

I made a God out of blood
Not superiority
I killed the king of deceit
Wake me up in anarchy
Anarchy
Anarchy
Anarchy

Trapped under ice
Comfortably cold
I've gone as low as you can go
Feel no remorse
No sense of shame
Time's gonna wash away all pain

I made a God out of blood
Not superiority
I killed the king of deceit
Now I sleep in anarchy

I made a God out of blood
Not superiority
I killed the king of deceit
Wake me up in anarchy

Born of revenge
Raised on cement
Chaos created government

I made a God out of blood
Not superiority
I killed the king of deceit
Wake me up in anarchy
Anarchy

jada887 wrote:

columbine22 wrote:

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

Do you think that he  was lying?

"ll just go to some downtown area in some big ass city and blow up and shoot everything I can. Feel no remorse, no sense of shame"

"it's just another word like justice, sorry, pity, religion, faith, luck "

Dwayne Fuselier would say, "If you felt any kind of remorse, Eric, you wouldn't have done it." It's very difficult to argue that point. Let me give a brief example: Jill has an annoying dog. John lives next door to Jill and can't stand her dog's incessant barking. John hatches a plan to entice Jill's dog with dog treats laced in poison. But before he goes to execute the plan, John says that he wishes he wasn't a sick person, so that he would feel pity for the animal he about to poison. John executes the plan anyway. Do you believe John? Do you think he was remorseful?
Think about this scenario for a moment.

I don't know about being remorseful before the act but I know you can feel guilt and shame over it. I also believe that in that scenario John would be remorseful after the dog has died. Especially if he saw what pain he caused Jill. Eric and Dylan obv are not around anymore to feel that remorse. They didn't get to see the pain and destruction they caused. I think if they would have lived they would have been remorseful.

Dwayne Fuselier is biased.
He went several hours that day not knowing if his son was dead or alive.Many of his sons close friends were very emotionally affected by the event.There is little chance he could have given an unbiased diagnosis of events.He should have taken himself off the case and its a shame he didn't.

I've said this before many time but any time someone brings this up,I feel compelled to point the above out.

PaintItBlack wrote:

Dwayne Fuselier is biased.
He went several hours that day not knowing if his son was dead or alive.Many of his sons close friends were very emotionally affected by the event.There is little chance he could have given an unbiased diagnosis of events.He should have taken himself off the case and its a shame he didn't.

I've said this before many time but any time someone brings this up,I feel compelled to point the above out.

I'm ok with Fuselier's analysis of the killers..  his analysis was months after the events of 4/20 and entirely based upon the journals of E&D  he is/was one of the best in the field at the time.  I wouldn't underestimate a person of his levels ability to separate his emotions.  I read that he didn't even see his son Brian until late that evening upon returning home from the crime scene @ CHS.

Here are some good links related to this topic:

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

PaintItBlack wrote:

Dwayne Fuselier is biased.

You misunderstood me. I wasn't talking about Dwayne Fuselier but rather what he's said, which I think is logically correct because Eric and Dylan knew and anticipated the consequences. When you at the totality of the visual evidence, I find it very difficult to believe either side.

There was an interesting study done a few years ago by a Canadian team of psychologists who wanted to observe the facial expressions and cues of remorse. The study was divided into two groups, those who were genuinely remorseful and those who were not. The remorseful group showed very limited emotional release; while the deceptive group put on an emotional performance. What I've stated here is just a brief synonymous of the study. You can read the rest here:

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

What would be the point of Eric feigning remorse anyway? His whole idea was to come across in his journal and the basement tapes as a tough alpha male getting his revenge. He wouldn't ruin that by deceiving people into thinking he had remorse when he didn't.

I mean why would he write about how he hates everyone so much and wants them all to die, and then go and say sorry a bunch of times, if he was still playing this "tough" character? I doubt he cared about getting people's sympathy; he wanted to be seen as a ruthless killer like Timothy McVeigh but couldn't avoid feeling bad about it.

Would he have done it by himself without Dylan though?

I think the only reason either of them went through with it was because there were 2 of them. They encouraged and fed off each other. I doubt either would've done it alone.

Fatheroftwo wrote:

A person doesn't have to hit every "check point" on the DSM profile to be diagnosed with a certain disorder.  Nor do people display certain emotions with absolute consistency.

Eric is a classic sociopath, undeniable with any understanding of what the true qualifiers are.

I don't mean to be nitpicking, but sociopathy and psychopathy are different things. Sociopaths have empathy, psychopaths don't. Also neither of these are truly diagnosable, though there has been some suggested modification to the anti-social personality disorder criteria for the DSM V that discuss psychopathy.

I'd talk about it here, but it's 2 am and I can't be bothered to get the article I was reading. I'll be writing a post in the next week about how the post-mortem diagnosis of psychopathy in Eric actually stacks up according to the current science, rather than just taking Cullen/Fuselier's word for it.

BlackandWhite wrote:

What would be the point of Eric feigning remorse anyway? His whole idea was to come across in his journal and the basement tapes as a tough alpha male getting his revenge. He wouldn't ruin that by deceiving people into thinking he had remorse when he didn't.

Unfortunately, I can't read minds or know for certain why Eric did what he did. I reached the conclusion I did based on simple logic and prior research. A person who feels remorse or guilt for what they have done does not react the way Eric was reported to have reacted on tape. A remorseful person makes limited eye contact or movement and doesn't dramatize the event. The fact that Eric often repeated his apologies while instructing Dylan to "feel the rage" doesn't suggest that Eric felt remorse for the victims or his family.

Now, you asked why Eric would feign remorse. I think that Eric probably assumed his parents would watch the video, and he wanted to explain, in his own terms, why he wasn't the son they assumed he was. Once again, my analysis is only conjecture, but I don't believe for a moment that he truly felt remorse. Remorse is the "tell-tale heart" that's difficult to hide, especially if the emotion is legitimate. If you are a body language expert, you could easily spot a remorseful person because their movements are predicated and often limited. That's primarily why I don't believe Eric.

I do believe Eric had remorse. Not on that day, but definitely prior. I know that he wasn't that cold-hearted of a person, just someone who got hurt alot and was finally broken.

shades wrote:

.... I know that he wasn't that cold-hearted of a person, just someone who got hurt alot and was finally broken.

You think. This seems very far from objective.

runreilly wrote:

You think. This seems very far from objective.

Why are you correcting what I'm meaning to say? It's easy to evaluate off his life experiences, how he was when he was pre-teen that he wasn't a cold-hearted person. He had affection for people and things.

jada887 wrote:

Unfortunately, I can't read minds or know for certain why Eric did what he did. I reached the conclusion I did based on simple logic and prior research. A person who feels remorse or guilt for what they have done does not react the way Eric was reported to have reacted on tape. A remorseful person makes limited eye contact or movement and doesn't dramatize the event. The fact that Eric often repeated his apologies while instructing Dylan to "feel the rage" doesn't suggest that Eric felt remorse for the victims or his family.

Now, you asked why Eric would feign remorse. I think that Eric probably assumed his parents would watch the video, and he wanted to explain, in his own terms, why he wasn't the son they assumed he was. Once again, my analysis is only conjecture, but I don't believe for a moment that he truly felt remorse. Remorse is the "tell-tale heart" that's difficult to hide, especially if the emotion is legitimate. If you are a body language expert, you could easily spot a remorseful person because their movements are predicated and often limited. That's primarily why I don't believe Eric.

I don't understand why you are bringing up body language in regard to Eric's supposed expression of remorse when none of us have ever been able to view the tape. The study you previously posted does not suggest that showing any emotion at all proves that a person is faking remorse. It is much more complicated and says that the range of emotion in faked remorse is greater and that there is emotional leakage that can indicate deception. It was also a small scale study conducted on 31 college students who had already engaged in the minor transgressions that they felt remorse for so it's not exactly a universal proof that can be applied to every situation, especially that of an emotionally volatile teenager who had not yet committed the grave offense he was referring to.

Remorse (or even guilt) is the wrong word and I think the discussion of whether Eric truly had remorse before he engaged in this massacre is bordering on nonsensical because a person cannot feel remorse or guilt for something they have not yet done. No, Eric certainly did not feel remorse for something he hadn't done because that's impossible whether you are a psychopath or a saint. If he had lived, he may have felt remorse or he may not have but we will never know because he killed himself immediately after the act. If you look at the diversion papers, they asked Eric how often he felt "mixed up or confused" and Eric answered "all the time." I think it's highly probable that Eric genuinely felt conflicted about what he was planning to do but he was set on doing it (knowing the whole time that he would not have to live with the emotional or physical consequences) and that was what he did.

shades wrote:

runreilly wrote:

You think. This seems very far from objective.

Why are you correcting what I'm meaning to say? It's easy to evaluate off his life experiences, how he was when he was pre-teen that he wasn't a cold-hearted person. He had affection for people and things.

Because this this is Hitler/Ted Bundy loved dogs argument.

runreilly wrote:

Because this this is Hitler/Ted Bundy loved dogs argument.

You have confused me, cause at first you didn't like that I said I knew that he wasn't cold hearted.

I don't really care anymore to be honest, I just wanted to point out that Eric wasn't a complete sociopath especially if he had feelings.

sscc wrote:

I don't understand why you are bringing up body language in regard to Eric's supposed expression of remorse when none of us have ever been able to view the tape.

I apologize. I should have quoted my sources before I posted. Most of what I've found about Eric's body language comes from Dave Cullen/Jeff Kass's interviews with Dwayne Fuselier.

Quote :

The study you previously posted does not suggest that showing any emotion at all proves that a person is faking remorse. It is much more complicated and says that the range of emotion in faked remorse is greater and that there is emotional leakage that can indicate deception. It was also a small scale study conducted on 31 college students who had already engaged in the minor transgressions that they felt remorse for so it's not exactly a universal proof that can be applied to every situation, especially that of an emotionally volatile teenager who had not yet committed the grave offense he was referring to.

I think you misunderstood the study I presented. The study illustrated how complicated remorse truly is--not only for the victims, but for the perpetrator. The range of emotions that these college students exhibited in the study proves that lying is more difficult for the perpetrator because they must hone their skills on the fly. I've participated in field research on this subject--remorse feigning-- in a county jail. The perpetrators of the crimes were so skilled at behavioral suppression that they were able to exhibit calm, rational behavior without blinking an eye. Other times, the perpetrators sometimes cracked jokes or fidgeted when asked a simple question. Most of the time, the perpetrators got inconsistent when pressed hard enough. So, in summation, lying becomes an act, and the act become a lie.

However, I would like to point out that this study doesn't discredit what other researchers have done in the past, only to show that deceit, like you've mentioned, is difficult to quantify. Social science is full of casual relationships.

jada887 wrote:

Dave Cullen/Jeff Kass's interviews with Dwayne Fuselier.

I agree with what [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] said. I think Eric was definitely capable of empathy, and he did (at least at some point) sincerely feel bad about the pain he would bring his family and others. But his rage and "mixed up or confused" feelings were stronger and allowed him to commit the crime. This is just my opinion based on what I've learned about Eric, but of course there will always be people who give the same information a different meaning and are convinced that he really was a psychopath. It's a neverending debate.

jada887 wrote:

I should have quoted my sources before I posted. Most of what I've found about Eric's body language come from Dave Cullen/Jeff Kass's interviews with Dwayne Fuselier.

Could you post the exact information you were referring to?

jada887 wrote:

I think you misunderstood the study I presented. The study illustrated how complicated remorse truly is--not only for the victims, but for the perpetrator. The range of emotions that these college students exhibited in the study proves that lying is more difficult for the perpetrator because they must hone their skills on the fly. I've participated in field research on this subject in a county jail. The perpetrators of the crimes were so skilled at behavioral suppression that they were able to exhibit rational, calm behavior without blinking an eye. The study doesn't discredit what other researchers have done in the past, only to show that deceit, like you've mentioned, is difficult to quantify. Social science is full of casual relationships.

How am I misunderstanding the study if I stated that the study showed remorse was much more complicated than your brief analysis suggested and you just agreed with me? I thought that you had oversimplified your explanation of the results (which I did too, to be honest) and I also wanted to express that I didn't understand why you brought up the study in this context in the first place. Was it meant to be a comment on Eric Harris' facial expressions and body language in the basement tapes? The people in the study were speaking to other people in the room while expressing remorse and Eric Harris was looking into a camera by himself. This is one major difference that could have a substantial effect on how much "eye contact" there was in the video and this seems to be a major indication for you that he was lying. Also, in the posted study, a large portion of the results were based on the fact that the facial expressions and body language were carefully examined using thousands of still images recorded during the experiment and then the sequence of emotions were analyzed to see if there was any pattern of frequency or transition between emotional expressions within false and true remorse. I was not aware that this sort of in depth analysis was conducted on the basement tapes by Fuselier so it seems disconnected from the results of the study. Again, I must bring up the important fact that this study (and your own observation of prisoners) was research conducted on actual transgressions that had already taken place (even for the expressions of faked remorse) but Eric had not yet carried out his plan. For a number of reasons, it seems like the wrong research to direct attention to in this discussion and that was my point. I was not saying that the study was invalid but it only seems to be vaguely related to Eric Harris' expression of remorse and should probably not be used to justify the assertion that Eric was being deceitful.

I think that a lot of Eric's hate grew up from misconceptions about people. He thought that "gay people should be killed" because for no absolute valid reason he thought of them as weak and wrong. He had prectically zero self-esteem, so targeting minorities maybe made him feel superior. And I agree with what [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] said. Eric was extremely confused and in search for a scapegoat to shake off his anger. He definitely had a lot of feelings and the desire to improve humanity by making other people aware about their concerns over trivial things, but his philosophy took the wrong turn when he decided that "tabula rasa" was the only option he had left.

That's why probably why a lot of girls rejected him, I mean their had to be a reason why they were scared to go with him to the prom. He acted like an asshole and sometimes he thought he was better than everyone else.

[quote="BlackandWhite"]

jada887 wrote:

I agree with what [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] said. I think Eric was definitely capable of empathy,

I'm confused. Did I ever say he wasn't capable of feeling empathy?
Also, before I get into this, I just want to say I disagree with Fuselier's assessment. I only brought up Fuselier because I agree with his statement about Eric's guilt: if he felt any sort of remorse, he wouldn't have done it. That's all.

Quote :

but of course there will always be people who give the same information a different meaning and are convinced that he really was a psychopath. It's a neverending debate.

If you click on my name, and look at the posts I've written, you will see that I disagree with Cullen, and that I have serious problems with his book from a psychologist's point of view. I don't see what we disagree about, other than I don't believe Eric really felt any remorse for his family or friends. If he felt empathy, he wouldn't have gone through with his plan. Eric knew the repercussions for his family, he knew the consequences, but he didn't care. Therefore, I doubt Eric's apologies were genuine.

As I've mentioned in the post to sscc, before I lost everything I wrote in that post, I said that body language is only part of the equation, albeit a secondary part. We also need to take into consideration what Eric said, as well as his body language. We can do that because Dwayne Fuselier had analyzed every frame of the basement tapes. He was able to pick up on Eric and Dylan's nonverbal cues. If you look at those cues in juxtaposition to Eric's verbal statements, you would find it difficult to believe Eric.

sscc wrote:

How am I misunderstanding the study if I stated that the study showed remorse was much more complicated than your brief analysis suggested and you just agreed with me?

I said feigning remorse is difficult, although I noted that some people are quite good at it, like Eric.

I wrote to you about this in a long post; however because I took so long to type out my message, I lost everything I typed because this website logged me out, and now I don't feel like typing it again. However, I want to apologize. I looked through my copy of Dave Cullen's book and discovered that Dwayne Fuselier was talking about Dylan's eye movements and expressions, not Eric's. Sue Klebold gives a more detailed account of Eric's hand gestures and Dylan's body language. I marked these passages up because you can't find those minute details in the basement tape transcript. For Jeff Kass, I will have to look at my copy again later on tonight.

jada887 wrote:

Also, before I get into this, I just want to say I disagree with Fuselier's assessment. I only brought up Fuselier because I agree with his statement on Eric's guilt: if he felt any sort of remorse, he wouldn't have done it. That's all.

If you click on my name, and look at the posts I've written, you will see that I disagree with Cullen, and that I have serious problems with his book from a psychologist's point of view. I don't see what the issue is, other than I don't believe Eric really felt any remorse for his family or friends. If he had any sort of empathy, he wouldn't have gone through with his plan. Eric knew the repercussions for his family, he knew the consequences, but he didn't care. Therefore, I doubt Eric's apologies were genuine.

Isn't it possible to know the repercussions of an action, feel guilty or conflicted while imagining what you're going to do and do it anyway? I think people do this all the time. Sometimes they write in their suicide notes "I'm so sorry for what I'm about to do but I have to do it," which is almost exactly what Eric said. Does going through with the suicide knowing that they are going to terribly hurt the people that they love mean that their expression of guilt is not genuine? I don't think so. The logic that someone can't possibly feel guilty about something and do it anyway (because the guilt would prevent them from doing it if they really meant it) is not indisputable unless you have already conceived of this person as incapable of feeling empathy or remorse.

sscc wrote:

I think people do this all the time. Sometimes they write in their suicide notes "I'm so sorry for what I'm about to do but I have to do it," which is almost exactly what Eric said.

Eric jokes about duping his parents in the basement tapes, and he also states that intervention wouldn't have helped and laughs about this quite often. I admit that suicidal people do exactly what you have said, but that is a false equivalence. In the basement tapes, Eric treats his parents as if they are a means to an end, and we know what that end is. I couldn't imagine a suicidal person joking about what he or she will do, or thank his or her lucky stars that their plans succeeded, but as Sue Klebold has said, murder-suicides are so rare, so I don't know for certain. I just have a problem trusting admitted liars.

jada887 wrote:

However, I want to apologize. I looked through my copy of Dave Cullen's book and discovered that Dwayne Fuselier was talking about Dylan's eye movements and expressions, not Eric's. Sue Klebold gives a more detailed account of Eric's hand gestures and Dylan's body language. I marked these passages up because you can't find those minute details in the basement tape transcript. For Jeff Kass, I will have to look at my copy again later on tonight.

No problem. I have not read Kass' book. I did a quick search for information about Fuselier's analysis but I have not been able to locate specific information about Eric's body language while apologizing, only Cullen relating that "to the untrained eye, he seemed sincere" yet the psychologists saw a psychopath. From what I have read, he seems to base the idea that Eric's apologies were not genuine on the fact that he made justifications and went through with it anyway more than anything else.

jada887 wrote:

I don't believe Eric really felt any remorse for his family or friends. If he felt empathy, he wouldn't have gone through with his plan. Eric knew the repercussions for his family, he knew the consequences, but he didn't care. Therefore, I doubt Eric's apologies were genuine.

Don't you think it's possible that eric HAD empathy and remorse and then he STOPPED having it thus giving up, making it easier to commit homicide ala people who snapped. I think it is possible to know the repercussions and know that it would he hurt his loved ones but SELFISHNESS and THROWING HIS HANDS UP on being better is done for him. He would rather kill and commit suicide.

I believe his apologies are genuine. He wouldn't be wasting time saying them on the basement tape if it were fake. Sure it could be his last facade, but I can't help but know in my gut feeling he really meant them. If any of the two had any form of last remorse at all it is Eric cause Dylan was just out of it from the get-go.

sscc wrote:

Isn't it possible to know the repercussions of an action, feel guilty or conflicted while imagining what you're going to do and do it anyway?

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I WOULD KNOW THIS CAUSE THIS IS ME MYSELF! I HAVE BEEN LIKE THIS!

sscc wrote:

jada887 wrote:

However, I want to apologize. I looked through my copy of Dave Cullen's book and discovered that Dwayne Fuselier was talking about Dylan's eye movements and expressions, not Eric's. Sue Klebold gives a more detailed account of Eric's hand gestures and Dylan's body language. I marked these passages up because you can't find those minute details in the basement tape transcript. For Jeff Kass, I will have to look at my copy again later on tonight.

No problem. I have not read Kass' book. I did a quick search for information about Fuselier's analysis but I have not been able to locate specific information about Eric's body language while apologizing, only Cullen relating that "to the untrained eye, he seemed sincere" yet the psychologists saw a psychopath. From what I have read, he seems to base the idea that Eric's apologies were not genuine on the fact that he made justifications and went through with it anyway more than anything else.

It seems that way. But if you think about it for a moment, and it doesn't seem illogical. To Fuselier, Eric's apologies went like this: "I am sorry, but I had to do this," or "I'm sorry for the shit I'll put you through, but you know, war is war, etc." Fuselier thought he was making excuses instead of genuine apologies.