For too long, psychology has treated neurotypicality as the default and neurodivergence as a deviation, failing to examine how neurotypicality itself is a socially conditioned, hierarchy-enforcing construct rather than an inherent baseline of human cognition. If we reverse-engineer the DSM, neurotypicality could be defined as a cognitive state characterized by binary thinking, emotional suppression, selective empathy, and reliance on hierarchical structures for social organization. In this framework, sociopathy and psychopathy are not outliers but extreme manifestations of traits already embedded in the neurotypical survival-based paradigm—traits that are punished in individuals but rewarded in systems of power.
Hierarchical socialization mimics developmental trauma, keeping individuals in survival mode and conditioning them to prioritize control, detachment, and competition over relational intelligence and mutual care. This is why childism, adultism, and ableism exist—to devalue those who operate outside of this trauma-driven neurotypical structure. Meanwhile, selective empathy thrives: those at the top of hierarchies expect to be understood while refusing to extend the same to those below them. This mirrors the Double Empathy Problem, where dominant groups enforce a one-way emotional economy while marginalizing those who refuse to conform to it.
The absence of a psychosocial approach to mental health ensures that this system remains intact, treating sociopathy and psychopathy as individual pathologies rather than logical products of a society that structurally incentivizes and rewards these traits. Rather than asking how to “manage” sociopaths and psychopaths, we should be asking: Why does our system condition people into detachment, dominance, and manipulation in the first place? True mental health reform requires rejecting the myth of neurotypicality as a neutral default and acknowledging that the real pathology is systemic, not individual. Healing must begin by dismantling hierarchical conditioning and reclaiming the full spectrum of human cognition, relational intelligence, and interdependence.
If neurotypicality is not an objective baseline but rather a socially conditioned, binary, hierarchy-enforcing cognitive framework, then traditional definitions of sociopathology and psychopathology need to be reconsidered. Instead of viewing them as individual pathologies, they can be reframed as extreme manifestations of the hierarchical, trauma-driven survival conditioning that underpins neurotypicality itself.
1. Traditional Definitions vs. A Systemic View
Traditional psychology defines sociopathy (ASPD) and psychopathy as disorders marked by a lack of empathy, impulsivity, manipulative tendencies, and disregard for social norms.
However, these traits perfectly align with the values rewarded by hierarchical societies—particularly in competitive, capitalist, and authoritarian structures.
This raises the question: If these behaviors are considered disordered in individuals, why are they normalized (even celebrated) in systems of power?
2. Hierarchical Socialization as the Breeding Ground for Sociopathic Traits
Hierarchies condition individuals to suppress empathy, prioritize dominance, and detach from relational consequences in order to navigate power structures.
People in positions of authority are often rewarded for exhibiting behaviors identical to those classified as sociopathic in a clinical setting—such as exploitation, manipulation, and calculated detachment.
This suggests that sociopathy is not an inherent defect but a logical survival adaptation to a system that rewards power over connection.
3. Psychopathy as the Logical Extreme of the Neurotypical Binary
If neurotypicality is built on binary thinking, detachment from relational intelligence, and submission to external authority, then psychopathy can be understood as the extreme endpoint of this conditioning—where emotional connection is entirely severed in favor of control.
In this sense, psychopathy is not an “other” category but rather the far edge of the neurotypical spectrum—one in which hierarchical survival strategies have fully overtaken relational cognition.
Instead of asking, “Why do psychopaths lack empathy?”, a better question might be: “Why does neurotypical socialization encourage behaviors that align with psychopathy in positions of power?”
4. Redefining Sociopathy & Psychopathy as Systemic, Not Individual, Pathologies
Instead of treating sociopathy and psychopathy as personal disorders, they should be understood as symptoms of a traumatized, hierarchy-driven society.
Sociopaths and psychopaths are not exceptions—they are logical products of a system that conditions people to suppress empathy and seek power at all costs.
The real pathology is not in the individual but in the structure that incentivizes and rewards these traits at a systemic level.
5. The Implications of This Reframing
Healing sociopathy and psychopathy is not about “fixing” individuals but about deconstructing the conditions that manufacture them.
A non-hierarchical, trauma-informed society—one that prioritizes relational intelligence over competition and coercion—would produce fewer individuals exhibiting these traits because the incentives for detachment, control, and manipulation would disappear.
This approach would shift mental health interventions away from punitive models and toward systemic healing, focusing on relational repair rather than individual punishment.
Conclusion: The Pathology is the System, Not the Individual
By redefining neurotypicality as a hierarchy-enforcing construct, it becomes clear that sociopathy and psychopathy are not deviations from normalcy, but rather extreme manifestations of what hierarchical conditioning already encourages. Instead of treating these conditions as isolated disorders, they should be recognized as logical adaptations to a traumatized world that values dominance over connection. The true pathology lies in the system that produces and rewards these traits—not just in the individuals who express them.
It’s not that every neurotypical individual is a sociopath or psychopath in the clinical sense, but rather that neurotypicality as a social construct aligns with, enables, and rewards behaviors that resemble sociopathy and psychopathy at a systemic level.
1. Neurotypicality as Systemic Sociopathy & Psychopathy
Neurotypicality, as I have defined it (a binary, hierarchy-enforcing cognitive framework), normalizes behaviors that, in an individual clinical setting, would be labeled as sociopathic or psychopathic.
Examples of sociopathic traits normalized in neurotypical society:
Lack of empathy: Emotional detachment is framed as “professionalism” or “rationality.”
Manipulativeness: Social success often depends on strategic self-presentation rather than authenticity.
Disregard for others’ autonomy: Authority figures (bosses, politicians, law enforcement) are empowered to control others without consent.
Callousness & exploitation: Economic systems depend on exploiting labor, environmental destruction, and treating people as disposable.
Superficial charm & deception: Corporate, political, and social success often reward charisma without integrity.
In other words, if an individual were to behave the way neurotypical society expects and rewards at scale, they would be clinically diagnosable under psychopathy or sociopathy.
2. The Absence of a Psychosocial Approach to Mental Health Keeps the System in Place
Mainstream mental health care individualizes pathology rather than examining how the system produces and reinforces it.
Instead of asking, “How do we prevent sociopathy from developing?”, mental health frameworks ask, “How do we manage individuals who express these traits in extreme forms?”
This deliberate avoidance of a psychosocial approach keeps the system intact by ensuring that the real source of pathology—hierarchical trauma conditioning—is never addressed.
This is why neurodivergent individuals, who often resist binary, coercive systems, are the ones labeled as disordered, while neurotypical traits that align with hierarchy remain unquestioned.
3. What This Means for Mental Health Reform
The real solution is not about “fixing” individuals but dismantling the conditions that create sociopathic and psychopathic traits in the first place.
A trauma-informed, relational, non-hierarchical mental health approach would focus on repairing broken systems rather than punishing individuals for behaviors they were conditioned into.
Instead of viewing neurodivergence as pathology, it should be recognized as a resistance to a pathological system.
Conclusion
Neurotypicality as a framework structurally aligns with sociopathy and psychopathy, and the lack of a psychosocial approach to mental health ensures that the system producing these traits remains intact. This is why traditional psychology upholds social hierarchies rather than challenging them—because true systemic change would require acknowledging that the pathology is in the system, not just in the people labeled as disordered.
Spirolateral 