X Psy

Basic and Applied

Needless to say, Academia is ill-equipped to deal with violent criminal behavior as it relies on research studies done in controlled situations. We rely on none of that.

We also don't come in hating the subjects being discussed and are not beholden to anyone who might obviously be partly responsible. There's no use to moralizing. That's for religion. We can put aside our hatred, and our love, for the time it takes to study something.

We'll keep the term Anti-Social while painting with a large brush so as not to leave anyone out.

(It's no different than using the word "Social" in Social Psychology where "social behavior" is defined and discussed based on the accepted "academic" and therefore statutory sense. Evaluation of, and criticism or non-criticism of, said behavior is completely subjective with academia defaulting to the view of the state. One state's social is another state's or person's anti-social.)

Peripherally, we're using the term Anti-Social in the legal sense as per a law and order society, but we acknowledge "Anti-Social" to be a relative term. One man's social is another man's anti-social.

Anti-Social

There are 2 Prevailing Theories of "Extreme"

"Anti-Social" Behavior:

1. Irrationalism

Irrationalist Theory is the Insanity Theory.

Irrationalist Theory of Crime and Murder is still widely being debated and discussed. We have to ask, Why?

Are we to believe men are more irrational than women because they commit more crimes?

You can say all children are less rational and are often delinquents, but they are not irrational, no more than men are more irrational than women.

But I would use children as a clue to the root cause of adult criminal behavior. That doesn't mean we have to transpose the same level of "innocence" onto an adult.

2. Immoralism

Immoralist Theory is the Good vs Evil Theory.

Good vs Evil is a religious concept and has to be based on religious scriptures. It’s not a secular concept at all although it keeps being used in secular settings without religious underpinning or scriptural support.

Religious works tend to equate all men as essentially indistinguishable with respect to "good and evil" with the real battle of light and dark taking place in a completely different realm.

The greater evil here is not considered to be the one with the greater crimes but the one with the greater knowledge (advanced and in advance). This makes it hard to judge a greater guilt or a greater evil.

Immorality is a universally shared trait (and widely imposed, like irrationality, by irreligionists, but only on specific individuals or groups). It doesn't help us.

Then there’s a third theory:

3. Extremism or Xtremism

Extremist Psychology Theory is simply that: Extremism Theory. It’s never promoted unless they’re talking about Religious Extremists.

We will use the term Xtremist to differentiate from that common usage of Extremism.

Is The Mad Trapper from North Dakota?

The injustice done to the so-called "Mad Trapper" is attested to by William Carter who became a Mountie after the hunt, and Bill White, Mountie and author of Mountie In Mukluks. Almost everything anyone else says about the Mad Trapper is false. He has been mythologized as the ultimate "baddy". But his relative innocence makes him good for what we want. Good. Safer.

I'd say he's relatively safe as a prototype for Anti-Social Criminal behavior. Once you know the truth about him, he doesn't engender extreme negativity that will cloud your judgment and thus impede the furtherance of knowledge — knowledge that might bring closure and justice, and prevent future tragedies.