Hello everyone,
I've had a busy day and my legs are aching with that not-enough-sleep feeling. Lately, I've been having nightmares with spiders infesting my room. At least when I dream, no one is chasing me down a street calling me a failure (That would mean you have Nightmare disorder).
I originally wanted to find a TEDtalk for one of my best friends, Donelyn, who is starting her own blog about engineering and design and activism. She's a wonderful writer, and she's starting to figure out what she's doing in life and I'm all for it.
Originally I had wanted to do today's post on a TEDtalk relating to her. That TEDtalk will have to wait for next week. I have several in mind, but I don't have the time to write and reflect on them right now, given that I forgot it was Tuesday and spent 4 hours at a Starbucks caught up in conversation with a fellow writer. Now it's after midnight and it's not even Tuesday anymore. You know my rules, though...I haven't slept yet! Wednesday doesn't come until I wake up!
Instead, I found this VERY recent TEDtalk from the conference last March. My conversation in Starbucks today involved a fair amount of psychology. (And fellow writer, if you end up reading this, Pavlov has a dog. It's Chekov with the gun.) So it seems that I'm in the mood for psychology, and not design...for a change.
Jon Ronson has a good story to tell about his trip down psychopathy lane (yeah, you try saying that word out loud). He started with the DSM--the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders--and decided to see how many disorders psychiatrists might think he has. According to the DSM, he has 12.
As a journalist, he naturally had questions about his find.
"Anyway, I was looking through this book, wondering if I was much crazier than I thought I was, or maybe it's not a good idea to diagnose yourself with a mental disorder if you're not a trained professional, or maybe the psychiatry profession has a strange desire to label what's essentially normal human behavior as a mental disorder.
I didn't know which of these things was true, but I thought it was kind of interesting. And I thought maybe I should meet a critic of psychiatry to get their view.
Which is how I ended up having lunch with the Scientologists."
From there, they introduce him to a man in Broadmoor Hospital for the Criminally Insane (which coincidentally happens to be the name of a resort hotel in Colorado and a gated community golf club in Seattle).
This man's name is Tony, and he claimed to have faked madness to get out of jail.
Well, it worked, and they locked him up for being a psychopath for almost three times as long.
It was this encounter that made Jon begin to question the way people perceived him. Perception is a WHOLE other story that I can't get into today, but Tony's caretakers essentially would watch him for "non-verbal clues" to his mental state.
"But how do you sit in a sane way? How do you cross your legs in a sane way?"
So naturally, Jon wanted to know if he was sitting like a journalist, or acting like a journalist.
Personally, I just want to know what an insane person looks like when they're sitting. O_o
Anyway, the TEDtalk above talks about the test that creates the line between psychopaths and normal people. Apparently, more CEOs are supposed to be psychopathic.
HOWEVER, a number of things need to add up in determining whether or not a person is psychopathic, and not all of those things are on this list. Hare was only one man. Rorschach was another. And then there's the personality of the evaluator to consider. And the truth is, there are gray areas here, and "you shouldn't define people by their maddest edges ... The gray areas are where you find the complexity, it's where you find the humanity, and it's where you find the truth."
 |
| I see an elephant with red eyes, two legs, and a halloween robe with only those long, draping sleeves and no bottom half. |
It's hard for me to completely swallow this truth, though. It's true that we live in a world that condemns those who live in the gray area. It's also true that we shouldn't define people by these things alone. But I think we should watch out for the gray area. Some people like to lurk in those shadows far too often. Some people do it too proudly. Some people use the gray area as an excuse. (and I'm not excluding myself from these)
I don't know what to think. Psychology intrigues me, but there are so many variables, it's difficult to see things other than patterns that may or may not be attributed to certain personality types or inclinations.
Do you think if we understood psychology more, we'd be more apt to anticipate and avoid conflict because we understood one another? or to enrich our relationships? or do you think we'd use it to stereotype and make assumptions? I'm not even going to ask about using it for manipulation...just think of ads. >.<
Food for thought--especially on what would have been September 11th.
Happy Tuesday, everyone.
i don't know if this video was a smart start to another day at this monster corporation, but i loved it-- so witty talking about the human wit. i wouldn't mind enriching my relationship, but knowing my own temperament i don't think psychoanalyzing my partner would do me any good. of course, i already do it... i guess being more "in-tune" with psychology would just destroy me. think about it, if you spent your brain power thinking about your interactions with people can you really engage with them and that moment? maybe i'm a psychopath and just misunderstanding emotional engagement ;]
ReplyDeleteps. thanks for the shoutout, ash
knowing you, if you psychoanalyzed your partner, you'd hold unfulfillable expectations. =P I already said that we're all psychopaths to a small degree.
DeleteP.S. no probs, Dee. It's an amazing feeling to watch your pageview count go up. =P
if you would like to add to this ted video mr ronson had a book called the psychopathic test really interesting :)
ReplyDeleteAmazing and great look. I think if you use different color may be it gives your more beautiful look. stone setter Vancouver
ReplyDeletePlease keep in mind perspective! I witness these labels getting passed around too much. If you feel inferior anyone is a narcissist, for example. If you are hypersensitive, many will have no remorse and empathy. I have been able to gain information from the perspective of the ones acting on the calculated smears. All these bully labels from psychology are used just as that, smears.
ReplyDeleteEvery definition of this fantasy icon has no causation. There is no defect or significant physical detected imbalance in the human anatomy, for these fantasy icons. Everyone has their own variation. The descriptions are ambiguous, open to confirmation bias and impression. There is no causation or existing defect to even create a logical grouping of symptoms. The ‘symptoms’ are also being assumed based off bias impression of what one alleges someone did. The ‘symptoms’ are ambiguous criteria derived from a persons impression. Actually, it is only the victims or patients, so to speak, that list the signature and very specific traits and MO’s of these types. You can asses David Parker Ray’s psych brainwash manual, as a start. Many of these types, are ‘counselors’. There is a reason why the ‘counselors’ fail to expose the MO’s and signature traits, along with adding vague and ambiguous ‘symptoms’ that can even be applied to the victim or people who are not these types. Again, they are the types that are fixated on what things appear to be. As long as something appears to be something, all is ok. Truth and reality does not matter, it’s what things appear to be.
“It will appear the she/he is ‘mentally unstable” but really it was me that took advantage of their vulnerability and if they keep taking those pills they will be an entire object that represents me. I can also use that object after my treatment really sets in, and write about them as if I am the competent god if the mind, and get more status gain”.-nurser of the mind.
These types gain sense of control by controlling others with emotions and private sensitive knowledge about them. Approval and other mind games are a big lever for them. They are more passive and patient with their MO’s. (Slow, steady, prolonged-passive, secretive, well planned) They gain the levers and control through talking and or counseling. They tend to keep it like a secret control. They like little secrets and like you to ‘read in between the lines, so to speak. The most deceptive of these types are woman, as they have more orbital frontal lobe tissue to modulate amygdala, way less testosterone and don’t have the same alpha male drives as men. Pity and sympathy tends to be more assumed, with woman and less suspicious. Most of our serious male killer tortures, were seriously brainwashed and dictated by their mother. The Gaines case is one of many examples. Gaines was a ‘patient’ vehicle of his mother.
What your likely dealing with is arrested development which is usually at a cut off between 10-15 and your more grown, practiced, calculating and more methodical middle school bully.
"I have been able to gain information from the perspective of the ones acting on the calculated smears. All these bully labels from psychology are used just as that, smears."
DeleteI found this article that gives a horrific yet real world case that vindicates exactly what you're talking about, and all within a model that aims to combat "abuse." What is their version of abuse, though? That's the part that is often not considered...it's good material. Quite disturbing, though.
http://eminism.org/readings/pdf-rdg/disloyal.pdf