????那么究竟是什么賦予了這些精神變態(tài)的人這樣過(guò)人的天賦，就算你死死地盯住這些人的眼睛，他們也能保持冷靜的頭腦？答案很有可能就來(lái)自大腦。對(duì)于大多數(shù)正常人來(lái)說(shuō)，身處應(yīng)激情境中，比如超難的考試、觀看恐怖片或是擊退襲擊者時(shí)，大腦中的某部分會(huì)對(duì)疼痛、恐慌或是其他激動(dòng)的情緒有著強(qiáng)烈的反應(yīng)。但對(duì)于精神變態(tài)者來(lái)說(shuō)，情況恰恰相反，他們?cè)诟叨染o張的情景中反而能夠比平時(shí)更加冷靜、沉著。

????達(dá)頓說(shuō)，從本質(zhì)上來(lái)說(shuō)，精神變態(tài)者天生就表現(xiàn)出極強(qiáng)的情緒控制能力，而這樣的能力則是西藏僧侶或是精英士兵非歷經(jīng)多年艱苦訓(xùn)練而不可達(dá)到的境界。從這個(gè)意義上來(lái)說(shuō)，這些人似乎是更能適應(yīng)這個(gè)殘酷的、有著極大不確定性的危險(xiǎn)世界。

????然而，就像冰激凌和美酒一樣，“精神變態(tài)”一旦過(guò)了頭，則就會(huì)適得其反。那些看起來(lái)“一切正?！钡木褡儜B(tài)者里面，總會(huì)出現(xiàn)幾個(gè)連環(huán)殺手。但是什么造就了這兩種不同的“精神變態(tài)者”呢？原因很復(fù)雜，但可歸結(jié)為是自我控制和社會(huì)方面的因素。達(dá)頓在書(shū)中寫(xiě)道：“精神變態(tài)者的命運(yùn)取決于很多因素，其中包括遺傳基因、家庭背景、教育水平、智商和機(jī)遇?！?/p>

????那么，撇開(kāi)謀殺和其他暴力行為不談，我們?nèi)粢〉贸晒?，是否也該發(fā)展些精神變態(tài)類(lèi)的性格特征呢？不一定，但達(dá)頓的確也總結(jié)了幾種個(gè)性，供希望生活變得更輕松一點(diǎn)的正常人選擇。這幾種個(gè)性包括意志力、注意力和專(zhuān)注力。達(dá)頓注意到，認(rèn)知行為診療師們多年前就已經(jīng)開(kāi)始幫助患者培養(yǎng)這樣的品質(zhì)，而佛教徒在這方面的訓(xùn)練歷史則更為久遠(yuǎn)。

????達(dá)頓是講故事的高手，他可以把一個(gè)原本干枯無(wú)聊的心理學(xué)研究講述得十分生動(dòng)有趣。但偶爾有些地方也是生動(dòng)過(guò)頭了，比如：“換句話說(shuō)，瘋癲的神經(jīng)巨浪不會(huì)像天塌了一般沖刷著理性邏輯那晶瑩剔透的海岸?！编?，請(qǐng)問(wèn)，您到底想說(shuō)什么？

????達(dá)頓談到心理學(xué)以外的領(lǐng)域時(shí)，論證就不那么嚴(yán)密了。他在書(shū)中某處提到，這些精神錯(cuò)亂的性格特征和如今的商業(yè)世界特別具有相關(guān)性，并聲稱(chēng)：“與其他時(shí)代不同的是，新千年之后，公司犯罪才開(kāi)始變得空前猖獗起來(lái)?！?/p>

????就我們所知，他或許是對(duì)的。但在他所做的這個(gè)巨大假設(shè)的背后，卻沒(méi)有任何的數(shù)據(jù)或是研究結(jié)果來(lái)支持，所以讀者還是不明所以。誠(chéng)然，大蕭條所帶來(lái)的種種創(chuàng)傷還歷歷在目，至今仍不斷爆出的公司丑聞和CEO下臺(tái)。另外在次貸危機(jī)愈演愈烈時(shí)許多臭名昭著的藝人不但逃脫懲罰，有些反而還獲利不菲。這些都是事實(shí)，然而，高管人員精神方面的性格與公司犯罪之間并無(wú)確鑿的數(shù)據(jù)關(guān)聯(lián)。我們只能說(shuō)，有關(guān)公司犯罪報(bào)道增多的原因，是新聞業(yè)的孜孜不倦地挖掘黑幕、是公司雇員人數(shù)的增長(zhǎng)也是商業(yè)道德的日益受重視的結(jié)果。

????無(wú)論如何，達(dá)頓的觀點(diǎn)沒(méi)錯(cuò)。如今，隨著勞動(dòng)力市場(chǎng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的日益加劇、美國(guó)面臨“財(cái)政懸崖”以及歐洲經(jīng)濟(jì)前景的不明朗，身處職場(chǎng)也越來(lái)越像“如臨深淵”。處在這樣一個(gè)世界，唯有精神些許變態(tài)的人才能走得更遠(yuǎn)。

????譯者：唐昕昕

????So what, exactly, gives psychopaths such talent, the ability to be cool as a cucumber, even when they are staring death straight in the eye? It comes down to brains, it seems. For most of us, when we are thrown into a stressful situation, whether it's a high-stakes exam, watching a scary movie, or fighting off an attacker, the parts of the brain that actively respond to pain, panic, and other emotions kick into high gear. For psychopaths, it's the opposite. They even calm down during these moments of heightened tension.

????Essentially, Dutton argues, psychopaths naturally display the kind of emotional self-control that Tibetan monks and elite soldiers spend many years developing. In this respect they seem ideally suited for a cruel, uncertain, dangerous world.

????Much like ice cream and great wine, however, there can be too much of a good thing when it comes to psychopathy. For all the seemingly "functional" psychopaths out there, there are at least a few serial killers. But what separates the two types? The answer is complicated, but it comes down to a combination of self-control and social abilities. "The fate of a psychopath depends on a whole range of factors, including genes, family background, education, intelligence, and opportunity," writes Dutton.

????So, murder and other violent actions aside, should we all embrace our inner psychopath if we want to get ahead in life? Not quite, but Dutton does offer a few qualities that non-psychopaths should work on if they want to get through life a little easier. They include mental toughness, focus, and mindfulness. Dutton notes that cognitive behavioral therapists have been helping their patients develop these qualities for years now. Buddhists have been on the case for even longer.

????Dutton spins a solid yarn, turning what could easily have been a dry survey of psych research into entertainment. At times, he overdoes it. Case in point: "The neural tsunami of madness need not, in other words, wash apocalyptically up on the crystalline shores of logic." Umm, what?

????The argument also gets hazy when Dutton ventures outside his own field of psychology. At one point he suggests that psychopathic traits might be especially relevant in today's business world, claiming that "the new millennium has seemingly ushered in a wave of corporate criminality like no other."

????For all we know, he might be right, but he backs this massive assumption with nary a statistic or study. We are left in the dark. Sure, we are all raw with the pains of the Great Recession, the scores of corporate scandals and CEO resignations, and the way in which many of the most egregious actors in the run-up to the housing crisis have largely escaped punishment, or even profited. In the absence of data correlating corporate criminality with executive psychopathy, however, we might just as easily argue that reports of wrongdoing are up because of the never-ending news cycle, the expansion of the workforce, and increased sensitivity (among some) to corporate ethics.

????Nevertheless, Dutton has a point. With competition in several job markets tightening, a nearing "fiscal cliff" in the U.S., and Europe in a state of painful economic uncertainty, today's working world can easily feel like a dark place. In such a world, a little psychopathy can go a long way.