The Origins of the West in Psychopathy and Testosterone

In my interview with Professor James Fallon, we discuss the similarities of the psychopathic brain and that of libertarians.  He explains that 'psychopath' is a broad description of various combinations of characteristics which are, in turn, dependent on the interaction of 15 different genes.  As such, those we describe as psychopathic are not necessarily sociopathic and dangerous; for example, they could simply be charming, charismatic and witty, like Jim.  He describes the way he empathizes with others as being dependent solely on a part of the top of the brain which is involved in cold, rational thought, thus 'cognitive empathy'.  A 'normal person' would use a combination of this with a part of the underside of the brain which produces emotional empathy.  However, most would predominantly use this emotional side of the brain, genuinely feeling the pain of others.  For someone like Jim, however, he can only ever understand someone else's pain but never 'feels' it himself; his brain comprehends rather than exactly mirrors the emotions of another.  In this way, most people are socialistic to a degree; their emotional thought dominates their rational thought, if their rational brain is engaged significantly at all.  As Jim explains, the 10% of people who are intuitive and highly rational, predominantly use their cognitive brain and tend to be libertarian.

Moreover, the West owes its existence to the higher average levels of psychopathy and testosterone of European peoples.  Jim describes his research on the Indo-Europeans and how these higher levels produced a larger number of 'big men' - the more predatory and dominant wolves amongst the feeble sheep.  As well as a greater focus on individualism, such genes also produced the higher degree of rationalism which Weber described as the unique feature of the western civilization.  This produced the libertarian aristocracies of ancient Europe in which there was no one despot, as developed everwhere else in the world.  Where there was one main leader, he was always a first among equals.  He welcomed competition because he wanted the companionship of other strong men, the prestige and respect he desired more than the control of others.  (See my interview with Ricardo Duchesne on the Indo-European origins of the Faustian spirit of the West)
The oriental despot sought to eradicate all competition and sociopathically control others, producing collectivist tyranny.  However, classical liberal principles, such as the rule of law, have continued to be held up as ideals in the West despite the development of proper states in the form of mediaeval constitutional monarchs. 

Jim concludes, sadly, a libertarian society could not be readily achieved, even in the West, because of the socio-biological obstacle of the irrational thinking of the masses of...well...sheep.  Although, perhaps, as Walter Block suggested, a concentration of intuitive, rational thinkers in one area might allow for the secession of a free, or at least freer, society.  In any case, understanding the genetic factors involved is an important first step.  Simply ignoring the influence of genes and focussing solely on environmental factors, as the environmental determinists do, is dangerous and is only designed to further leftist ideology.  But I'll let Jim explain all that: