i think what is important to reiterate is that socios are not immune to oversight, (even if they self-confidently assume to be know-it-alls).
emotions occupy a vast amount of the typical mental landscape (for some more than others) and what socios can do is over-simplify in their assessments, leading to false judgements.
they are predators, connecting the dots, making quick decisions. they aren't interested in the depths of people's emotional worlds, so much as how people's actions affect them. that does mean they lack insight as to the depths of a certain type of human capability, but that's not important to them, i don't think.
there are self-aware socios, those who realise that what they lack, cannot be totally compensated for by what they do have, in all circumstances.
there's always sacrifices with an atypical brain, but 'soul' is a biased and meaningless concept.
It's because socios spend their time observing others because they have to mimic behaviour to fit in. While normal people grow up into a person, socios observe that process and adapt to many personalities and choose which to be around certain personality types. It's not some magical ability but trial and error, like behaviour psychologists. How a person uses his hands, movement of eyes, posture, subtle changes in tone of voice and things like that are what socios pay attention to. They fish for a reaction and draw conclusions from these reactions and piece by piece form a whole picture. The accuracy of scanning someone in such a manner is usually very good because they have been that person in some situations. That is why they enjoy meeting new people, to learn more patterns and nuances of personality to be what that person wants others to be so they can become that person on the fly, if the situation warrants it.
"they have no sense of the profundity of normative motivation, since they don't have it, [therefor?] they are unafraid and unmindful of calling out their statistical findings about others."
it sounds like you're saying that because sociopaths have never felt deep social emotions they have guiltless interactions. but i actually have no idea what you mean by 'calling out their statistical findings about others.'
As for insight, you don't have to know what an acorn tastes like to know that a squirrel was compelled to eat because it was hungry. Likewise it is not necessary to experience deeply the entire emotional spectrum to recognize what outward projection elicits desirable responses. (desirable responses being used very loosely here, by the way) simple observation will suffice.
Manipulation is not a complex machine. your emotions are the pivot, and all i have to do is lean on the lever to compel you to move.
Having insight is knowing the purpose behind your actions, but not necessarily using that information to modify behavior in any 'good' way. An insightful sociopath just knows what they are doing and are doing it on purpose because they want to.
a non insightful sociopath still knows what they are doing but do it by instinct because they are compelled to. want need not enter in to it.
Maybe the Faustian Bargain could be made externally by an observer watching a sociopath use insight to 'choose' knowledge over soul, but that kind of sentiment is not something a sociopath would internalize.
It's not so much a deal with the devil, as it is deal with a car salesman. kinda banal, but i got a new ride.
Why you does thinks MANIPULATION does be important?
I thinks there does be some PEOPLES who does maybe like manipulation and maybe a lot does BE peoples who not cares about PEOPLES much. But I not sees why you tryes to ARGUES something like this. Why nobody even talks about what if sociopaths not really exists?