A criminal will, from time to time, express themselves emotionally offering tears of sadness for a friend or joyful praise for a responsible accomplishment. This expression, however, is an inconsistent feature of their personality; it is often contradicted by victimizing behavior. A criminal may, for example, help an old lady across the street in the afternoon, only to rob a convenience store in the evening.
In a fleeting sense, a criminal also expresses sentimentality toward family members, the helpless, plants, pets, religion, and so on. These expressions are isolated from the rest of their personality, though, and are often a means of maintaining a self-image as a good person. They can also be used as a balance, set up as an excuse for self-destructive behavior. One manifestation of criminal sentimentality can be found in criminal art.
In order to confront the thinking error of sentimentality, the criminal must recognize it as a consistent pattern in their personality. Acting immediately on one’s feelings, among other selfish behaviors, leads to irresponsibility. These irresponsible actions defeat sustained caring and real concern for others. Good deeds are discontinued in favor of excitement.
Another way to address a criminal’s sentimentality is in having them think or even write about the injury they have caused others. At the same time, the criminal must realize that a good deed does not make up for wrongdoing. Additionally, the creation of daily and long-term goals and priorities can be used in overcoming self-defeating sentimental behavior. For example, the criminal could make a detailed morning list of what they need to complete on that day. This could help them avoid becoming irresponsible on the spur of a moment.
A criminal must acknowledge that some of their sentimentality is expressed in the giving away of money and material things. They must realize that in order to develop a responsible sense of value, they cannot afford to give away money or possessions.
Finally, the criminal must recognize their spiritual self. When a criminal becomes involved with religion, their new religious beliefs must support responsible habits, values and concern for others. This approach would keep the criminal from abusing religion in an effort to avoid accountability for their misdeeds.
Understanding lack of effort as a criminal thinking error involves first defining it in relation to activity and energy. The criminal thinker has unlimited ‘energy’ for the activities they are interested in pursuing. However, they lack effort for activities that they consider boring, unexciting or uninteresting. An effort is the use of energy to complete distasteful tasks. It can often be heard in treatment settings that if the client would spend half as much time working on their goals as they did on complaining about things, they would be well on their way to success.
The criminal thinker does not achieve satisfaction from using power responsibly. The responsible use of power is not exciting enough! In treatment programs, when an offender’s thinking or behavior is challenged, the automatic response is to attempt to exert control over the situation. This attempt to gain control and divert attention away from oneself is called a ‘power thrust.’ A power thrust is by definition an irresponsible and harmful thinking choice. Criminal thinkers will regularly fall back on this thinking tactic whether or not there is something to be gained from the situation. Manipulating others and putting oneself in a position of authority comes naturally to the criminal thinker and extends to every aspect of their lives including social, emotional, work, play, sex, crime, financial and even in their views of religion. Religious leaders are typically viewed as con men or fools by criminal thinkers and participation in religious activities is performed as a means to a financial or socially manipulative end.
A common perception among criminal thinkers is the idea that they are different and better than others. Even when a criminal is repeatedly arrested for a violation, their ‘uniqueness’ in thinking leads them to believe that it won’t happen to them again. Common sense would dictate that if I am arrested multiple times for the same situation I should learn from those arrests and stop violating the law. However, uniqueness dictates that I am better than the average person who gets arrested and I can still beat the system.
Our stereotypical view of a “hardened” criminal is that they are fearless. Criminals are portrayed in the media, and often in movies, as callous, reckless, quick-tempered, ready to fight and angry. In reality, criminal thinkers have many fears. The primary fear is actually a fear of fear itself. Admitting fears would mean that the criminal would have to acknowledge they are not in control which is antithetical to their of view themselves and their way of life. Criminals have a compelled need to be in control of every situation including their emotions. In their mind, allowing fear to be present would mean they are vulnerable, weak and out of control.
Responsible living to the criminal thinker is akin to solitary confinement. The perceived boredom and lack of excitement in a responsible life are worse than the possibility of jail or prison. The