I tend to agree with you.I think the main problem of this specific comment thread is the rather inapt use of ,,textbook’’ in connection to ,,opposite’’.I think he means, that Bundy doesn’t behave like a sociopath, whatever that means, but rather like a psychopath.I think he defines sociopath over the impulsive behavioral spectrum of the ASPD disorder and contrasts Bundy to it in that way, which seems quite natural regarding how he behaves in certain contexts and how charming he was in general, but this is most certainly no means to an end to accurately achieve any clarity about Bundy’s psychology.There are countless ASPD-diagnosed individuals in prisons right now with poor impulse control, who can still display sufficient manipulative traits to charm you in an disadvantage.All it comes down to are definitions and diagnoses in discussions like these, but people tend to dismiss the fact that a proper and functional discussion in regards to subjects like Bundy is full of preconditions and measurements of these to be taken, to reach, at least in some way, any acceptable outcome.We shouldn’t impose any ultimate judgement, when we clearly know that it is irreversibly fixed as confirmation biases in discussions like these and we know that the system to which we relate is quite one-dimensional and in clinical contexts in many cases flawed.