:: Corporation : Clinical Diagnosis (PCLR) ::

Clinical diagnosis (PCLR) of personality of corporation. Opinions by Dr. Robert D. Hare, Milton Friedman, Noam Chomsky, Peter Drucker.

Dr. Robert D. Hare is a researcher renowned in the field of criminal psychology. He is professor emeritus of the University of British Columbia where his studies centered on psychopathology and psychophysiology. He developed the Psychopathy Checklist (PCL) and Psychopathy Checklist Revised (PCL-R), used to diagnose cases of psychopathy and also useful in predicting the likelihood of violent behavior. He advises the FBI's Child Abduction and Serial Murder Investigative Resources Center (CASMIRC) and consults for various British and North American prison services.
------------------------------

Milton Friedman was an American Nobel Laureate economist and public intellectual. An advocate of economic freedom, Friedman made major contributions to the fields of macroeconomics, microeconomics, economic history and statistics. In 1976, he was awarded the Nobel memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his achievements in the fields of consumption analysis, monetary history and theory, and for his demonstration of the complexity of stabilization policy.

According to The Economist, Friedman "was the most influential economist of the second half of the 20th century...possibly of all of it."
-----------------------------------

Peter Ferdinand Drucker (November 19, 1909--November 11, 2005) was a writer, management consultant and university professor. His writing focused on management-related literature. Peter Drucker made famous the term knowledge worker and is thought to have unknowingly ushered in the knowledge economy, which effectively challenges Karl Marx's world-view of the political economy.

Category:

Sports

Tags:

• corporation
• PCLR
• Robert
• Hare
• Milton
• Friedman
• Noam
• Chomsky
• Peter
• Drucker
• psychopath

[LordBifford]

I don't feel comfortable comparing corporations to psychopaths. It confuses the concept in people's minds. A psychopathic individual and a corporation of many people are not alike.

I know anti-corporates would enjoy this definition, but I wonder whether Prof Hare does a disservice to his own work. Psychopathy is not widely understood and the word is heavily misused.

[observationspring]

"A psychopathic individual and a corporation of many people are not alike."

Indeed. For example, corporations are much more powerful/influential, than individuals. However the singular *legal persona* of the corporation can and should be analyzed. That analysis is presented here.

[suckittrebek619]

@OutlawTomFantastic They're made up of people, but operate far differently. And regulations aimed at keeping corporations honest in no way infringes on the personal rights of the owners.

Even if I were to buy your assumption that government wants to limit corporate prosperity, it absolutely DOES have that right if it is obtained illegally, used against the state, or if it puts the public in danger.

But this is a moot point, because our government is simply a PR firm for big business

[cynt123able]

Great observation skeletonbite.

[roryphelan]

What is this clip taken from?

[Cindycllns]

You want evidence..live where I live

[organysntracey1]

Hmmm... interesting Mr. Friedman. Does that mean, since the supreme court has now defined a corporation as a "person" (and there's no limits on their campaign contributions) we can now hold them responsible? Or is that just for congress to get kickbacks for their lobbying efforts? 

[LordBifford]

@lgpyt Diagnosing a corporation as psychopathic is not serious in a scientific sense. A corporation is a group. A psychopath is an individual. Group psychology and individual psychology are different things.

[futebolarte3]

why psychopathy should be considered a disease in the first place? Psychopathy fits very well into this amoral corporate world...

[skeletonbite]

I see a lot of comments saying that his analysis is inapplicable to corporations without providing any analysis or evidence.

Hare's examples are pretty legitimate if you look at the actions and values of corporations. Lying/manipulation, sense of entitlement, lack of empathy, failure to accept responsibility (worker exploitation/abuse, environmental polluting, planned obsolescence, toxic products etc.). All those characteristics are obvious and play off of each other.

[charredpalace]

Seems that he really wanted to tell the world of his opinions.

[lgpyt]

@LordBifford You are correct, corporations are different from individuals, however corporations do indeed carry the same rights as individuals in the US. Maybe stripping them of this and legally treating them differently would allow for a better clinical definition. Until then, however, they are recognized legally as individuals so this diagnosis is legally relevant.

[THEOZZYFUL]

@MerulaMondlicht you just hit the nail right on the head

i shared your comment on facebook

hope you don't mind