You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Since the early nineteenth century, countless treatises have been written about the mental disorder once referred to by Prichard as "moral insanity"1 and later known as psychopathic, sociopathic, or antisocial personality. Benjamin Karpman deplored the plethora of writings on this subject because, in his view, they contributed nothing to an understanding of the condition "but merely cluttered up an already over-cluttered wastebasket."2 He admitted, however, that the disorder itself—characterized by the absence of moral feelings—is a distinct diagnostic entity (which he termed "anethopathy" or "ideopathic psychopathy"), although it afflicts only a small number of people and is based not on psychogenesis but on constitutional factors. Hervey M. Cleckley conceived of the psychopath as an ingenious robot, devoid of human emotions and unable to relate to people on a personal level.3 Cleckley's concept of psychopathy is similar to Prichard's "moral insanity" and Karpman's "anethopathy" or "ideopathic psychopathy." Thus, all these terms refer to antisocial conduct in non-psychotic individuals whose actions are not guided by moral feelings or a sense of guilt.
The diagnostic criteria for this disorder have undergone changes and refinements, as have the criteria for most other psychiatric conditions. The criteria currently in use and generally accepted (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual III-R) constitute a behavioral description rather than a general personality assessment. The DSM lists specific (antisocial) behaviors manifested by individuals with