To all the "Eric was a psychopath" people..

Please read this article:


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


Eric's journal was all an act. He brags throughout about how he can make us believe anything. He says he wants to "leave a lasting impression on the world". Hell the kid says he WISHES he was a sociopath so he wouldn't feel anything. If he knew what a sociopath was, and he really was a sociopath, then he would have known he was a sociopath. That's just how sociopathy works. How can this even still be an argument 17 years later?

I liked that article. I agree with a lot of it. Thanks for posting!

The article mentions that Eric had a leg deformity.  I know about his chest deformity, but not about the leg deformity.  Does anyone know what it was?

Nirvana92 wrote:

Please read this article:


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


Eric's journal was all an act. He brags throughout about how he can make us believe anything. He says he wants to "leave a lasting impression on the world". Hell the kid says he WISHES he was a sociopath so he wouldn't feel anything. If he knew what a sociopath was, and he really was a sociopath, then he would have known he was a sociopath. That's just how sociopathy works. How can this even still be an argument 17 years later?

That's exactly what a psychopath would say.

Freezingmoon wrote:

The article mentions that Eric had a leg deformity.  I know about his chest deformity, but not about the leg deformity.  Does anyone know what it was?

I am not sure it was a deformity persay...but his medical records show him going in for leg issues many times in his early childhood. Clear as mud though lol

I dont believe Eric was necessarily psychopath, I do however believe he was seriously mentally disturbed. Great article with a plausible theory.

xmichaelmyersii wrote:

Nirvana92 wrote:

Please read this article:


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


Eric's journal was all an act. He brags throughout about how he can make us believe anything. He says he wants to "leave a lasting impression on the world". Hell the kid says he WISHES he was a sociopath so he wouldn't feel anything. If he knew what a sociopath was, and he really was a sociopath, then he would have known he was a sociopath. That's just how sociopathy works. How can this even still be an argument 17 years later?

That's exactly what a psychopath would say.

No if Eric was a sociopath he would have said so. He had no reason to lie on the BT or in his writings. Most socios know they're different from a very young age, and a good deal of them end up diagnosed with Conduct Disorder before the age of 18. Crying over missed friends isnt something a sociopath would do either. Eric was nothing more than a wanna be badass.

Nirvana92 wrote:

xmichaelmyersii wrote:

Nirvana92 wrote:

Please read this article:


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


Eric's journal was all an act. He brags throughout about how he can make us believe anything. He says he wants to "leave a lasting impression on the world". Hell the kid says he WISHES he was a sociopath so he wouldn't feel anything. If he knew what a sociopath was, and he really was a sociopath, then he would have known he was a sociopath. That's just how sociopathy works. How can this even still be an argument 17 years later?

That's exactly what a psychopath would say.

No if Eric was a sociopath he would have said so. He had no reason to lie on the BT or in his writings. Most socios know they're different from a very young age, and a good deal of them end up diagnosed with Conduct Disorder before the age of 18. Crying over missed friends isnt something a sociopath would do either. Eric was nothing more than a wanna be badass.

I respectfully disagree.

xmichaelmyersii wrote:

Nirvana92 wrote:

Please read this article:


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


Eric's journal was all an act. He brags throughout about how he can make us believe anything. He says he wants to "leave a lasting impression on the world". Hell the kid says he WISHES he was a sociopath so he wouldn't feel anything. If he knew what a sociopath was, and he really was a sociopath, then he would have known he was a sociopath. That's just how sociopathy works. How can this even still be an argument 17 years later?

That's exactly what a psychopath would say.

No if Eric was a sociopath he would have said so. He had no reason to lie on the BT or in his writings. Most socios know they're different from a very young age, and a good deal of them end up diagnosed with Conduct Disorder before the age of 18. Crying over missed friends isnt something a sociopath would do either. Eric was nothing more than a wanna be badass.

If Eric was a psychopath so was Dylan.Nobody has shown me any convincing evidence or any evidence at all that this isn't the case other than This and that Dr. said so and Dylan wrote about wanting love and Eric wrote about killing.That's far from being enough to convince me.

Nirvana92 wrote:

Eric's journal was all an act.

Amen (although I wouldn't say "all". I believe that some of his notes were his true views, he just chose to form it in a way that would make him look hateful and rebellious (i guess?) therefore it was a some kind of "act" meant to be published after his death. He wanted to be perceived that way and it worked.

In my opinion I don't think it's as easy as just labeling one or both of them a psychopath and leaving it at that. E&D were complex, unstable individuals. I think it has more to do with their personalities and how they dealt with their struggles. I do believe they both suffered from mental illness to some degree, but not enough to excuse their actions. I agree with other comments I've seen on this board and elsewhere that state that Eric was, deep down, overly sensitive and struggled with his feelings, which probably had a lot to do with why he felt he had to prove his masculinity. It seems like he took things way too personal and developed a vengeful attitude. Maybe he conditioned himself to react with anger when things upset him to appear more masculine, as opposed to say crying over it. I also agree with other comments that stated that sexual frustration played a big role for both of them (might have been the root of the problem, maybe moreso than bullying). All those factors combined with their desperation to prove themselves and be acknowledged, along with teenage hormones set up a 'perfect storm' environment. And even in the end, I don't believe that either one would have acted without the other. If one of them did have second thoughts or secretly didnt actually want to go through with it after devoting so much time and energy planning and expecting it to be epic, I bet neither would have had the heart to back out and let the other down.

"Yeah he was just pretending to be full of hate it was an act"

>Shoots dozens of people

OK.

Nirvana92 wrote:

Please read this article:


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


Eric's journal was all an act. He brags throughout about how he can make us believe anything. He says he wants to "leave a lasting impression on the world". Hell the kid says he WISHES he was a sociopath so he wouldn't feel anything. If he knew what a sociopath was, and he really was a sociopath, then he would have known he was a sociopath. That's just how sociopathy works. How can this even still be an argument 17 years later?

There's a difference between psychopathy and sociopathy. I personally believe both Eric and Dylan were sociopaths, along with Seung Hui Cho, Anders Breivik and all of those shooters that had a "reason" behind their sprees.

That's essentially what a sociopath is -- someone who justifies their violence by citing political reasons. Timothy McVeigh is another great example actually.

"Yeah he was just pretending to be full of hate it was an act"

>Shoots dozens of people

OK.

WhereHateRunsRed wrote:

"Yeah he was just pretending to be full of hate it was an act"

>Shoots dozens of people

OK.

A human's mind & heart isn't just "black or white". The point was: the public as well as media try to present him as hateful only. They base it on his journal which shouldn't be used to examine his true personality since it was written a certain way on purpose.

Yeah I'm not that dense I was just pointing out to the people who believed he was all talk that the facts state otherwise

His journal was not an act. He attempted to do all the things he wrote about, which proves it was not an act.

Eric was a psychopath. The doctors who reviewed his writings, Dr. Frank Ochberg, Dr. Dwayne Fuselier, Dr. Mary Ellen O'Toole, and Dr. Peter Langman, have all identified him as a psychopath. Unlike message board posters, these doctors have experience with thousands of patients. Dr. Robert Hare, who invented the category of psychopathy, endorsed the diagnosis by linking it on his website.

Eric's writings and the testimony about his behavior from others is a textbook fit with the psychopathy checklist. Psychopathy is not about killing people. It is about superficial charm, a grandiose sense of self, a need for constant stimulation, a love of lying, a shallow sense of emotion, poor self control, failure to take responsibility for one's own actions, a predatory disposition to others, and finally a record of juvenile delinquency.

Dylan does not fit most of these categories. His demeanor is not glib or smarmy, he did not constantly try to manipulate people for amusement, he does not exult in lying or deceiving others as a pastime, and he does not have a shallow sense of emotion.

None of Hare, Fuselier, Langmann, or Cullen claim that psychopathy precludes emotions. On the contrary, Hare says that psychopaths often feel "shallow emotions" that are tiny compared to what a normal person would feel. Eric shedding tears over murdering 400 people and then trying to do it anyway is a great example of the kind of the "shallow emotion" that psychopaths feel.

Cullen: "Researchers often compare psychopaths to robots or rogue computers...That's the closest approximation of their behavior, but the metaphor lacks nuance. Psychopaths feel something; Eric seemed to show sadness when his dog was sick, and he occasionally felt twinges of regret toward humans." (p. 242-243).

In other words, textbook psychopath. Just like Dr. Peter Langman, Dr. Mary Ellen O'Toole, Dr. Frank Ochs, and Dr. Dwayne Fusilier all say.

lasttrain wrote:

His journal was not an act.  He attempted to do all the things he wrote about, which proves it was not an act.

Eric was a psychopath.  The doctors who reviewed his writings, Dr. Frank Ochberg, Dr. Dwayne Fuselier, Dr. Mary Ellen O'Toole, and Dr. Peter Langman, have all identified him as a psychopath.  Unlike message board posters, these doctors have experience with thousands of patients.  Dr. Robert Hare, who invented the category of psychopathy, endorsed the diagnosis by linking it on his website.

Eric's writings and the testimony about his behavior from others is a textbook fit with the psychopathy checklist.  Psychopathy is not about killing people.  It is about superficial charm, a grandiose sense of self, a need for constant stimulation, a love of lying, a shallow sense of emotion, poor self control, failure to take responsibility for one's own actions, a predatory disposition to others, and finally a record of juvenile delinquency.

Dylan does not fit most of these categories.  His demeanor is not glib or smarmy, he did not constantly try to manipulate people for amusement, he does not exult in lying or deceiving others as a pastime, and he does not have a shallow sense of emotion.

None of Hare, Fuselier, Langmann, or Cullen claim that psychopathy precludes emotions.  On the contrary, Hare says that psychopaths often feel "shallow emotions" that are tiny compared to what a normal person would feel.  Eric shedding tears over murdering 400 people and then trying to do it anyway is a great example of the kind of the "shallow emotion" that psychopaths feel.

Cullen: "Researchers often compare psychopaths to robots or rogue computers...That's the closest approximation of their behavior, but the metaphor lacks nuance. Psychopaths feel something; Eric seemed to show sadness when his dog was sick, and he occasionally felt twinges of regret toward humans." (p. 242-243).

In other words, textbook psychopath. Just like Dr. Peter Langman, Dr. Mary Ellen O'Toole, Dr. Frank Ochs, and Dr. Dwayne Fusilier all say.

You must have said 5 or 6 times now that you're not going to listen to anything people on a message board have to say over what these so called 'doctors' have to say? Why do you even bother visiting this message board if you don't care what anyone on it has to say? And you'd think if these doctors were so great, they'd know you can't properly diagnosis someone who is dead by writings they left behind.

I think they were too quick to slap a diagnosis on him b/c people wanted answers and it was one of the most logical, acceptable explanations. Almost like they were saying "Who cares, the kid murdered innocent people and blew his brains out. Typical psycopathic behavior. Next!" I just feel like there's way more to it than that.

Jenn wrote:

lasttrain wrote:

His journal was not an act.  He attempted to do all the things he wrote about, which proves it was not an act.

Eric was a psychopath.  The doctors who reviewed his writings, Dr. Frank Ochberg, Dr. Dwayne Fuselier, Dr. Mary Ellen O'Toole, and Dr. Peter Langman, have all identified him as a psychopath.  Unlike message board posters, these doctors have experience with thousands of patients.  Dr. Robert Hare, who invented the category of psychopathy, endorsed the diagnosis by linking it on his website.

Eric's writings and the testimony about his behavior from others is a textbook fit with the psychopathy checklist.  Psychopathy is not about killing people.  It is about superficial charm, a grandiose sense of self, a need for constant stimulation, a love of lying, a shallow sense of emotion, poor self control, failure to take responsibility for one's own actions, a predatory disposition to others, and finally a record of juvenile delinquency.

Dylan does not fit most of these categories.  His demeanor is not glib or smarmy, he did not constantly try to manipulate people for amusement, he does not exult in lying or deceiving others as a pastime, and he does not have a shallow sense of emotion.

None of Hare, Fuselier, Langmann, or Cullen claim that psychopathy precludes emotions.  On the contrary, Hare says that psychopaths often feel "shallow emotions" that are tiny compared to what a normal person would feel.  Eric shedding tears over murdering 400 people and then trying to do it anyway is a great example of the kind of the "shallow emotion" that psychopaths feel.

Cullen: "Researchers often compare psychopaths to robots or rogue computers...That's the closest approximation of their behavior, but the metaphor lacks nuance. Psychopaths feel something; Eric seemed to show sadness when his dog was sick, and he occasionally felt twinges of regret toward humans." (p. 242-243).

In other words, textbook psychopath. Just like Dr. Peter Langman, Dr. Mary Ellen O'Toole, Dr. Frank Ochs, and Dr. Dwayne Fusilier all say.

You must have said 5 or 6 times now that you're not going to listen to anything people on a message board have to say over what these so called 'doctors' have to say? Why do you even bother visiting this message board if you don't care what anyone on it has to say? And you'd think if these doctors were so great, they'd know you can't properly diagnosis someone who is dead by writings they left behind.

But if it is true that you cannot diagnose a dead person, how are these doctors--who in Dr. Hare's case invented the diagnostic criteria--doing it?

Who defines when you can and cannot diagnose someone? Doctors.

When did Eric lie as a pastime?He lied to keep himself out of trouble and to put forth the illusion that he was living a normal life with a planned future.Dylan did the exact same thing.

Ivan wrote:

Nirvana92 wrote:

Please read this article:


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


Eric's journal was all an act. He brags throughout about how he can make us believe anything. He says he wants to "leave a lasting impression on the world". Hell the kid says he WISHES he was a sociopath so he wouldn't feel anything. If he knew what a sociopath was, and he really was a sociopath, then he would have known he was a sociopath. That's just how sociopathy works. How can this even still be an argument 17 years later?

There's a difference between psychopathy and sociopathy. I personally believe both Eric and Dylan were sociopaths, along with Seung Hui Cho, Anders Breivik and all of those shooters that had a "reason" behind their sprees.

That's essentially what a sociopath is -- someone who justifies their violence by citing political reasons. Timothy McVeigh is another great example actually.

I agree to an extent, but its still not that simple. Just about anyone who kills another person will try and justify it. Its simple human nature. Sociopaths have a deep rooted belief in themselves that trumps all. A sociopath wouldn't write love letters like Dylan did. A sociopath wouldn't dream of killing themselves either and suicide altogether is rare for the disorder. I do believe Dylan was extremely selfish and loved manipulating people. He exhibited behavioral signs that very much remind me of an addict, except instead of drugs it was his own death he obsessed over. I think Dylan knew in his heart that he was eventually going to kill himself years before NBK happened. All the lies and manipulation (especially in his final year) was all done to assure his death.

I understand why people say Eric was a psychopath, but I can't accept it myself. I think a "crisis of masculinity" better explains the gap between the acting in his journal/BTs and IRL day-to-day personality his peers saw. IMO the fact that he willingly admitted suicidal and homicidal thoughts to his psychiatrist is quite telling. To a real psychopath/sociopath lying to a mental health professional is like their SuperBowl. Instead of lying though Eric told the truth like he really wanted help. Him crying over old friends is another is another one of those moments. That's a shocking amount of emotion for a cold blodded badass psychopath to show. Even weirder is the fact that he left it for us to see after putting in all the work to make his Reb character a reality.

I just can't accept the psychopath diagnosis either. I wanted to believe it at first.....I really wanted to, because then things would make sense.  But honestly, Dylan seems  more manipulative than Eric.  Dylan terrifies me the most.  Dylan seems the most sadistic.  I feel like Eric was salvageable under the right circumstances....Dylan not so much.

The field of psychiatry is just a huge cluster-f*ck.  Doctors misdiagnose the living on a frequent basis.....I certainly wouldn't be surprised if they misdiagnosed an 18 year old dead guy based on the ramblings found in his journal.

PaintItBlack wrote:

When did Eric lie as a pastime?He lied to keep himself out of trouble and to put forth the illusion that he was living a normal life with a planned future.Dylan did the exact same thing.

you know what, I feel like telling about lies. I lie a lot. almost constant. and to everybody

I could convince them that I'm going to climb Mount Everest . . . I can make you believe anything.

Here he is not just lying for self-preservation or to keep out of trouble, but for sport and to mock the people around him.

lasttrain wrote:

PaintItBlack wrote:

When did Eric lie as a pastime?He lied to keep himself out of trouble and to put forth the illusion that he was living a normal life with a planned future.Dylan did the exact same thing.

you know what, I feel like telling about lies. I lie a lot. almost constant. and to everybody

I could convince them that I'm going to climb Mount Everest . . . I can make you believe anything.

Here he is not just lying for self-preservation or to keep out of trouble, but for sport and to mock the people around him.

That really doesn't prove anything as he had to lie to most people he knew to keep out of trouble and to keep the NBK plan going.
As for the second quote just because he had some pride in how good he was at lying, doesn't mean that he did it just to be doing it .And again,Dylan lied a lot too.He put his family through a whole college odyssey knowing he almost certainly wasn't going be around to go.

Ivan wrote:

Nirvana92 wrote:

Please read this article:


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


Eric's journal was all an act. He brags throughout about how he can make us believe anything. He says he wants to "leave a lasting impression on the world". Hell the kid says he WISHES he was a sociopath so he wouldn't feel anything. If he knew what a sociopath was, and he really was a sociopath, then he would have known he was a sociopath. That's just how sociopathy works. How can this even still be an argument 17 years later?

There's a difference between psychopathy and sociopathy. I personally believe both Eric and Dylan were sociopaths, along with Seung Hui Cho, Anders Breivik and all of those shooters that had a "reason" behind their sprees.

That's essentially what a sociopath is -- someone who justifies their violence by citing political reasons. Timothy McVeigh is another great example actually.

Nirvana92 wrote:

I agree to an extent, but its still not that simple. Just about anyone who kills another person will try and justify it. Its simple human nature. Sociopaths have a deep rooted belief in themselves that trumps all. A sociopath wouldn't write love letters like Dylan did. A sociopath wouldn't dream of killing themselves either and suicide altogether is rare for the disorder. I do believe Dylan was extremely selfish and loved manipulating people. He exhibited behavioral signs that very much remind me of an addict, except instead of drugs it was his own death he obsessed over. I think Dylan knew in his heart that he was eventually going to kill himself years before NBK happened. All the lies and manipulation (especially in his final year) was all done to assure his death.

Not exactly - a lot of serial killers revel in the experience of being found out/caught. Some do (like you've said) try and justify it, but there are a lot of them who don't. I don't feel serial killers who seek out victims then try and justify it later are sociopaths - I believe they are psychopaths trying to use another angle of manipulation in order to get their way.

Sociopaths are different in that they lead a seemingly normal life until they decide they want to get back at society for the damage that's been done, eerily similar traits to the shooters/perpetrators I've listed above. The difference is they all had different thresholds. Eric and Dylan's weren't high enough - and I believe a sociopath may look at suicide as an escape. Dylan wanted to hurt others though as evidenced by his November 1997 journal entry.

Nirvana92 wrote:

I understand why people say Eric was a psychopath, but I can't accept it myself. I think a "crisis of masculinity" better explains the gap between the acting in his journal/BTs and IRL day-to-day personality his peers saw. IMO the fact that he willingly admitted suicidal and homicidal thoughts to his psychiatrist is quite telling. To a real psychopath/sociopath lying to a mental health professional is like their SuperBowl. Instead of lying though Eric told the truth like he really wanted help. Him crying over old friends is another is another one of those moments. That's a shocking amount of emotion for a cold blodded badass psychopath to show. Even weirder is the fact that he left it for us to see after putting in all the work to make his Reb character a reality.

I put Eric in the same category as Dylan, actually. I don't think they were too dissimilar - I think they were friends because they had so much in common. Both could manipulate very well, but as you have said, Eric was the one leaving signs behind.

An interesting thing to note too (even though it's unlikely) is that Eric wrote on one of his AOL profiles "I like being schizophrenic", perhaps indicating he knew he was sick but liked it?[/quote]

there are a lot of things they could have diagnosed Eric with but at the same time eric was a good deceiver after all we do know this much about him...

I can understand and believe that Eric wasn't as "psychopathic" as some people believe, but I don't quite understand why some of you are saying that Dylan was the scary one. Yeah, he lied and manipulated - but was it really any worse than Eric? Why are so many people saying Dylan was the most sadistic out of the two?

I can see where Dylan could be a little intimidating because of his size and as well as his voice,but I have to agree that Eric was probably the scary of the two... Why do so many people think this of Eric? I mean if you only believe what media tells you then yes Eric would be the "bad one". If people would take the time to actually look into them as people and set aside what they think they know about them and look at it then i believe they would see two teens that felt they had nothing to live for... why did Eric want to involve the school? well its obvious he wanted revenge on everyone that hurt him in some way. and I believe that the school he felt was the root of his pain...

Jenn wrote:

You must have said 5 or 6 times now that you're not going to listen to anything people on a message board have to say over what these so called 'doctors' have to say? Why do you even bother visiting this message board if you don't care what anyone on it has to say? And you'd think if these doctors were so great, they'd know you can't properly diagnosis someone who is dead by writings they left behind.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

lasttrain wrote:

But if it is true that you cannot diagnose a dead person, how are these doctors--who in Dr. Hare's case invented the diagnostic criteria--doing it?

Who defines when you can and cannot diagnose someone?  Doctors.

Wow. Just wow. Why do people treat mental illness so differently from physical. If a doctor gave a cancer diagnosis without examining a patient, you wouldn't believe it. But if a doctor diagnoses someone's mental state without being able to examine it (because funnily enough, you can't examine someone's mental state if they're dead), you just accept. Just because someone with a title says something, doesn't mean we 'lower' message board people have to be brain dead enough to accept it without question.

When Eric wrote about mauling people like a 'wolf' and how detail and graphic he'd kill them, that was just something he probably wrote on a really shitty day and was full of anger, i've done it too, i've had days where everyone was giving me a rough time and i'd say (or in his case write down) extremely hateful and twisted things, all in the moment of anger.  I think the fact he's deceased, and how he ended up dying is the reason they concluded he was a psychopath, they just took all the things a pissed off teen would say in anger as his true personality.

He was after-all just a kid who had low self-esteem, who was going through problems and the picture he wanted the world to see him as much more, which means he pretty much won, as he is this brutal cold blooded killer to 99% of people. They are giving him exactly what he wants, the people who expose him for just being a kid with problems are seeing right through this badass 'Reb' persona he built up.

Archvile wrote:

When Eric wrote about mauling people like a 'wolf' and how detail and graphic he'd kill them, that was just something he probably wrote on a really shitty day and was full of anger, i've done it too, i've had days where everyone was giving me a rough time and i'd say (or in his case write down) extremely hateful and twisted things, all in the moment of anger.  I think the fact he's deceased, and how he ended up dying is the reason they concluded he was a psychopath, they just took all the things a pissed off teen would say in anger as his true personality.

He was after-all just a kid who had low self-esteem, who was going through problems and the picture he wanted the world to see him as much more, which means he pretty much won, as he is this brutal cold blooded killer to 99% of people. They are giving him exactly what he wants, the people who expose him for just being a kid with problems are seeing right through this badass 'Reb' persona he built up.

I have to say nicely said... As I said the media turned him into what he wanted makes you think weather or not he knew they where going to do it or not...

Archvile wrote:

When Eric wrote about mauling people like a 'wolf' and how detail and graphic he'd kill them, that was just something he probably wrote on a really shitty day and was full of anger, i've done it too, i've had days where everyone was giving me a rough time and i'd say (or in his case write down) extremely hateful and twisted things, all in the moment of anger.  I think the fact he's deceased, and how he ended up dying is the reason they concluded he was a psychopath, they just took all the things a pissed off teen would say in anger as his true personality.

He was after-all just a kid who had low self-esteem, who was going through problems and the picture he wanted the world to see him as much more, which means he pretty much won, as he is this brutal cold blooded killer to 99% of people. They are giving him exactly what he wants, the people who expose him for just being a kid with problems are seeing right through this badass 'Reb' persona he built up.

Wonderfully said.I totally agree.I've wanted to express this same thought so many times.

Archvile wrote:

When Eric wrote about mauling people like a 'wolf' and how detail and graphic he'd kill them, that was just something he probably wrote on a really shitty day and was full of anger, i've done it too, i've had days where everyone was giving me a rough time and i'd say (or in his case write down) extremely hateful and twisted things, all in the moment of anger.  I think the fact he's deceased, and how he ended up dying is the reason they concluded he was a psychopath, they just took all the things a pissed off teen would say in anger as his true personality.

He was after-all just a kid who had low self-esteem, who was going through problems and the picture he wanted the world to see him as much more, which means he pretty much won, as he is this brutal cold blooded killer to 99% of people. They are giving him exactly what he wants, the people who expose him for just being a kid with problems are seeing right through this badass 'Reb' persona he built up.

I third this lol! A lot of the people making these sorts of comments never met Eric. What was he like on a "good day"? I am sure he had days that were good for him, where he was happy.....

Archvile wrote:

When Eric wrote about mauling people like a 'wolf' and how detail and graphic he'd kill them, that was just something he probably wrote on a really shitty day and was full of anger, i've done it too, i've had days where everyone was giving me a rough time and i'd say (or in his case write down) extremely hateful and twisted things, all in the moment of anger. I think the fact he's deceased, and how he ended up dying is the reason they concluded he was a psychopath, they just took all the things a pissed off teen would say in anger as his true personality.

He was after-all just a kid who had low self-esteem, who was going through problems and the picture he wanted the world to see him as much more, which means he pretty much won, as he is this brutal cold blooded killer to 99% of people. They are giving him exactly what he wants, the people who expose him for just being a kid with problems are seeing right through this badass 'Reb' persona he built up.

Congratulations, this comment needs a gold star!

Archvile wrote:

When Eric wrote about mauling people like a 'wolf' and how detail and graphic he'd kill them, that was just something he probably wrote on a really shitty day and was full of anger, i've done it too, i've had days where everyone was giving me a rough time and i'd say (or in his case write down) extremely hateful and twisted things, all in the moment of anger.  I think the fact he's deceased, and how he ended up dying is the reason they concluded he was a psychopath, they just took all the things a pissed off teen would say in anger as his true personality.

He was after-all just a kid who had low self-esteem, who was going through problems and the picture he wanted the world to see him as much more, which means he pretty much won, as he is this brutal cold blooded killer to 99% of people. They are giving him exactly what he wants, the people who expose him for just being a kid with problems are seeing right through this badass 'Reb' persona he built up.

The problem with your post is that he went on to try to kill 400 people. Eric having these fantasies was not the same as others having these fantasies. He meant it.

Dylan must have meant it also so he was in on this with Eric all the way.

Quote :

Wow. Just wow. Why do people treat mental illness so differently from physical. If a doctor gave a cancer diagnosis without examining a patient, you wouldn't believe it. But if a doctor diagnoses someone's mental state without being able to examine it (because funnily enough, you can't examine someone's mental state if they're dead), you just accept. Just because someone with a title says something, doesn't mean we 'lower' message board people have to be brain dead enough to accept it without question.

Not only that but the DSM IV of the time would not have allowed Eric to be diagnosed as a psychopath. Even the modern DSM V would be hard pressed posthumously.


But my personal opinion based on what I know and my personal anecdotal experiences would suggest Eric wasn't a psycho/sociopath.

Then again if we're going after body count then Stalin or Harry Truman are sick fucks...ok well Stalin was.


The leap of logic I use, Truman wanted to prevent further American deaths at the hand of millions murdered in Nagasaki and Hiroshima (I'm a nutso, I woulda done the same). Eric wanted to change the culture of society by kick starting a revolution. No more a sociopath on that logic than Truman or the Founders of the US or France for that matter.

Quote :

And you'd think if these doctors were so great, they'd know you can't properly diagnosis someone who is dead by writings they left behind.

Like chemists, physicists, economists, etc, psychologists are scientists, but their subject matter, like economists, is social behavior. Like the hard sciences, our experiments need to be falsifiable, meaning that we must be able to prove our hypothesis incorrect. But unlike chemistry, physics, computer science, our experiments are more often linked to casualty. In other words, the hard sciences are more falsifiable than casual, while the softer sciences are more casual than falsifiable.

That being said, I have read that Fuselier tried to falsify his hypothesis on psychopathy. What many people don't understand is that psychological diagnoses are hypotheses. So, I don't believe Fuselier made his diagnosis in haste. Rather, I think he might have concluded his experiment based solely on what Eric wrote/said/did in his journals and video tapes. Unfortunately psychologists cannot ignore the casual relationships and factors that crop up in experiments. Nowadays psychologists use a simple DSM criteria to determine whether a patient fits the disorder based on empirical observation of the patient, a simple method that ignores casualty. However, I think DSM types are flawed, and often misused. So, it is possible that Fuselier's framework is flawed. But, we'll never know, as he hasn't spoken to the public.

The DSM is the only way a mental diagnosis is given. Period. Dot. Yes the DSM has changed over time (flawed?) as a result of the change in ways to treat and understand mental disorders. But in 1998/99 as well as today based on the DSM, neither would have been diagnosed strictly through their writings/tapes.

I've done this with my son and it isn't a simple prick of a finger or written exam.

Imperator wrote:

The DSM is the only way a mental diagnosis is given.  Period.  Dot.  Yes the DSM has changed over time (flawed?) as a result of the change in ways to treat and understand mental disorders.  

That is not just my opinion. Several experts believe that the DSM codes are flawed on several counts. Take a look at this entry from a respected journal on the subject matter:

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

Here is a blog from a psychologist on Psychology Today on DSM-5. I completely agree with her analysis. Please read her blog:

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

I see a headline with criticism.

Fundamental Flaws of the DSM: Re-Envisioning Diagnosis

Authors

G. Kenneth Bradford
Lafayette, CA, USA, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]



One author.  I can't read the article so I don't know how "several" experts are noted.  Also the IF (impact factor) of the journal itself is pretty low.  Not sure what would make them the final arbiters on the subject matter anyways.

Edit: There are better sources than psychology today.

Imperator wrote:

One author.  I can't read the article so I don't know how "several" experts are noted.  

The link that I sent to you is an abstract from an academic psychological journal. Dr. Bradford's research is just one of many psychological research efforts that focus on improving the diagnostic quality of psychiatric and psychological evaluation. Although Bradford does note DSM's crucial importance to psychological evaluation, he advocates a more holistic approach. You could disagree with his research, analysis or recommendations; it's up to you. This essay is a small subset of the expert opinion available on the subject.

Quote :

 Not sure what would make them the final arbiters on the subject matter anyways.

There is no such thing as a "final arbiter[s]" in science. Yes, there are laws, but a law can be proven false under different testing conditions. Scientific enquiry is a constant quest for answers.

Quote :

Edit:  There are better sources than psychology today.  

True. There are better journals out there. Granted, this article was written by a sociologist who's written an excellent book on mental illness.

Really awesome discussion and so many interesting points of view. I'm not going to say either way what I think his diagnosis should be because I'm not a medical professional and I don't have a whole lot of faith in psychology anyway. I've seen too many healthy, highly creative, highly empathetic kids get drugged up with ADD medication or anti depressants instead of being taught how to channel that stuff productively and creatively. I'm not trying to say ADD and depression don't exist, because they do and that would make me an idiot BUT it's my opinion that they are severely over diagnosed. Almost twenty years later we're doing the same with Autism and Aspergers.

Big companies make big money drugging kids up, why bother trying to teach them emotional coping skills? Just drug them up to the eyeballs, don't listen to them when they tell you they're having homicidal/suicidal thoughts and then sit back and scratch your head as to why two boys took guns to school. No one was listening to them, not even Eric's therapist.

So is Eric a psychopath a sociopath or just another damaged, angry, medicated kid who constantly slipped through the cracks until it was too late to reach him? I guess we'll never know for sure.

I wouldn't say either was a psychopath and I feel sociopath is a bit of a stretch. They definitely both had some issues that were most likely exasperated by medication, hormones, and the general high school enviroment. Outside factors like violence in media may have made it a bit more palatable to them but it would have played a very minor role if any at all. I mean, violent games make people act like little assholes now but that seems to be more of the online culture rather than the game itself.

Ultimately, I think the two were essentially normal teenagers and that is what draws so many people to Columbine. They are relateable. They aren't the stereotypical, "bad boys". They're just your average nerdy teenagers and that is what scares people the most. Just like Hitler they could be anyone. We make them into monsters as a coping mechanism.

booyhyhhooooo

Am I the only one who thinks that neither Eric nor Dylan were psychopaths, but just incredibly fed up with almost everything, confused as hell without a valid guidance, and they tried to cope:

1) being aggressive to the point of explosion (E)
2) fueling depression until you start to actually believe that you're some kind of super entity of sadness which feels entitled to judge everybody (D)?

Amarantha wrote:

Am I the only one who thinks that neither Eric nor Dylan were psychopaths, but just incredibly fed up with almost everything, confused as hell without a valid guidance, and they tried to cope:

1) being aggressive to the point of explosion (E)
2) fueling depression until you start to actually believe that you're some kind of super entity of sadness which feels entitled to judge everybody (D)?

No I feel the same way since a long time ago