Anyone know if this article about a researcher looking at a scan of his own brain and "discovering he's a psychopath" is in line with current research? Because it's what I always think of when this topic comes up. The short version is that he was studying the brains of people who have been diagnosed with some version of antisocial tendencies, and was also doing a study on Alzheimer's, so he had brain scans of his family. He noticed one looked like the brains of other antisocial people, and oops, turns out it's his brain. But he's a functioning member of society that, while he can be an asshole sometimes, hasn't done any of the truly terrible things we typically think of as normal psychopath behavior--he's not a murderer, not a rapist, etc.

So why is that?

Why has Fallon been able to temper his behavior, while other people with similar genetics and brain turn violent and end up in prison? Fallon was once a self-proclaimed genetic determinist, but his views on the influence of genes on behavior have evolved. He now believes that his childhood helped prevent him from heading down a scarier path. “I was loved, and that protected me,” he says. . . .This corresponds to recent research: His particular allele for a serotonin transporter protein present in the brain, for example, is believed to put him at higher risk for psychopathic tendencies. But further analysis has shown that it can affect the development of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (the area with characteristically low activity in psychopaths) in complex ways: It can open up the region to be more significantly affected by environmental influences, and so a positive (or negative) childhood is especially pivotal in determining behavioral outcomes.

Of course, there’s also a third ingredient, in addition to genetics and environment: free will. “Since finding all this out and looking into it, I’ve made an effort to try to change my behavior,” Fallon says. “I’ve more consciously been doing things that are considered ‘the right thing to do,’ and thinking more about other people’s feelings.”

But he added, “At the same time, I’m not doing this because I’m suddenly nice, I’m doing it because of pride—because I want to show to everyone and myself that I can pull it off.”

Ever since I read that an number of years ago, I've been thinking about how nature doesn't make dangerous psychopaths--it only makes people who are particularly in danger in this society we're living in, where social bonds are weak and too many kids grow up with not enough attention and way too much anxiety. I don't know if this theory is considered too deterministic, but I've always thought it was really hopeful. I believe that a better world is possible, and if we build it, then people with these "antisocial" brains will be raised in an environment that lets them be them, but in a healthy way, like this scientist.

Anyway, I don't know anything about psychology and I have no idea if any of this is considered correct these days. Anyone out there know more?