I’ve been hesitating about asking this for about a week.

Psychologists distinguish between a “depressive episode” and a “depressive personality”. A “depressive episode” is a reaction of a susceptible person to a stressor. A “depressive personality” has all-of-life or most-of-life depression in the absence of stressors.

Similarly, there’s a distinction between an anxiety attack and a person who is continually anxious. A person who is continually anxious is one who continues to find new things to be anxious about, and whose anxiety about any specific thing grows with time.

But is there a “phobic personality” analogous to those two? A person who continually finds new things to be phobic of. One where for instance fear of germs enhances to include fear of cleaning products, fear of touching the ground, fear of dust, fear of opening drawers and cupboards, fear of certain smells, fear of mattresses, fear of the toilet seat, fear of coins, fear of washing clothes, fear of showers, fear of new clothes, etc.

I think I know such a person. Reaction to the phobia is in every case not “fright” but “avoidance”, the person does not exhibit the “fright” response or show fear.

How would such a person fit into the standard classification scheme? eg. Neurotic vs psychotic etc.

mollwollfumble said:

How would such a person fit into the standard classification scheme? eg. Neurotic vs psychotic etc.

The neurotic/psychotic distinction hasn’t been in the DSM since 1980.

i’ve got diagnosis aversion syndrome

transition said:

i’ve got diagnosis aversion syndrome

So does the person I’m talking about. Add fear of doctors and psychologists.

Psychosis vs neurosis is a very important distinction, even if it’s no longer accepted. A person with neurosis builds castles in the sky, a person with psychosis lives there.

transition said:

i’ve got diagnosis aversion syndrome

Wossat?

Doesn’t like being diagnosed.

Divine Angel said:

Doesn’t like being diagnosed.

Ah, I thought he meant “I’ve got (a) diagnosis (of) aversion syndrome.”

>A person with neurosis builds castles in the sky, a person with psychosis lives there.

:-) I like that

I’d go look in the DSM, but am stuck on normal’s got some troubles of its own

Bubblecar said:

transition said:

i’ve got diagnosis aversion syndrome

Wossat?

might’ve added a hyphen, which did think about while writing it, so’d look diagnosis-aversion syndrome

Fear of speed cameras

mollwollfumble said:

I’ve been hesitating about asking this for about a week.

Psychologists distinguish between a “depressive episode” and a “depressive personality”. A “depressive episode” is a reaction of a susceptible person to a stressor. A “depressive personality” has all-of-life or most-of-life depression in the absence of stressors.

Similarly, there’s a distinction between an anxiety attack and a person who is continually anxious. A person who is continually anxious is one who continues to find new things to be anxious about, and whose anxiety about any specific thing grows with time.

But is there a “phobic personality” analogous to those two? A person who continually finds new things to be phobic of. One where for instance fear of germs enhances to include fear of cleaning products, fear of touching the ground, fear of dust, fear of opening drawers and cupboards, fear of certain smells, fear of mattresses, fear of the toilet seat, fear of coins, fear of washing clothes, fear of showers, fear of new clothes, etc.

I think I know such a person. Reaction to the phobia is in every case not “fright” but “avoidance”, the person does not exhibit the “fright” response or show fear.

How would such a person fit into the standard classification scheme? eg. Neurotic vs psychotic etc.

… unless …

I spoke to the person, really spoke to them for the first time yesterday. The person directly lied to me at least twice, and her face failed to match what she claimed to be feeling on many more occasions. I came to wonder …

Unless all that is sheer window dressing, and what we have here is a Gone Girl, a psychopath who is willing to endure any amount of physical discomfort in order to hurt others.

If so, then this person is hiding their real personality under many layers of disguise:

Claiming to be depressed (she isn’t)
If you penetrate that level she appears to have hoarding disorder – it’s not normal hoarding
If you penetrate that disguise she appears to have OCD
If you penetrate that disguise she appears to have phobic personality
All to hide the fact that she’s a psychopath.

Yeah, definitely psychopath.

All the rest is window dressing.

The condition you describe seems to have a lot overlap with Avoidant personality disorder

———-

Psychopaths according to some bloke I heard on the electric wireless are typified by D J Trump.

Ian said:

The condition you describe seems to have a lot overlap with Avoidant personality disorder

Thanks for that, Ian. That looks like it. That one’s treatable.

>Psychopaths according to some bloke I heard on the electric wireless are typified by D J Trump

seen a chap pop up a few times on TV lately, written a book maybe, not sure now.

not an expert (not a psychologist or whatever), but done a lot of research, and some of what he said seemed persuasive.

so you know i’m glad to be armed now, it’s another tool (or weapon) in the arsenal of normal.

i’ve just fitted a modified magazine to an AK47, to accommodate the DSM, employing armor piercing rounds with a core of resilience.

transition said:

>Psychopaths according to some bloke I heard on the electric wireless are typified by D J Trump

seen a chap pop up a few times on TV lately, written a book maybe, not sure now.

not an expert (not a psychologist or whatever), but done a lot of research, and some of what he said seemed persuasive.

so you know i’m glad to be armed now, it’s another tool (or weapon) in the arsenal of normal.

i’ve just fitted a modified magazine to an AK47, to accommodate the DSM, employing armor piercing rounds with a core of resilience.

I find people who act overly charismatic not to be trustworthy, it comes across as an act to make you like them which instantly tells me the opposite

>I find people who act overly charismatic not to be trustworthy, it comes across as an act to make you like them which instantly tells me the opposite.

probably a sprinkle of them around.

transition said:

>Psychopaths according to some bloke I heard on the electric wireless are typified by D J Trump

seen a chap pop up a few times on TV lately, written a book maybe, not sure now.

not an expert (not a psychologist or whatever), but done a lot of research, and some of what he said seemed persuasive.

so you know i’m glad to be armed now, it’s another tool (or weapon) in the arsenal of normal.

i’ve just fitted a modified magazine to an AK47, to accommodate the DSM, employing armor piercing rounds with a core of resilience.

This bloke?

.
David Gillespie is a former corporate lawyer and investor and the author of the best-selling book, Sweet Poison.

Some years ago, David found himself working alongside a toxic human being, whom he now considers to have been a psychopath.

Psychopaths are typically people incapable of human empathy.

They tend to be charming in the initial phases of a relationship, then become parasitic and domineering.

In the workplace, their presence is often disruptive, and dangerous to the health of the people around them.

David has immersed himself into contemporary research into psychopathic behaviour, and developed some advice on dealing with a psychopath who worms their way into your life.

http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/conversations/conversations-david-gillespie/8717944

>http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/conversations/conversations-david-gillespie/8717944

that’d be the chap.

lot of what he said made sense, but trouble is these ideas float around in the aether, to be deferred to in a flash by any tom, dick or mary, sort of instant knowledge, an instant angle, part of normal’s easy-think.

normal’s a bastard too.

transition said:

>http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/conversations/conversations-david-gillespie/8717944

that’d be the chap.

lot of what he said made sense, but trouble is these ideas float around in the aether, to be deferred to in a flash by any tom, dick or mary, sort of instant knowledge, an instant angle, part of normal’s easy-think.

normal’s a bastard too.

Yeah, I wonder if personality types are used to make people who don’t conform to the shallow vacuous of society fell bad or not normal. I mean I find people for the most part annoying and tend to keep to myself and find the whole celebrity/hero worship/being a part of a team thing absurd and really wonder how people like it or buy into it. I would probably be diagnosed as having a personality disorder but perhaps the majority are the ones with a disorder

>Yeah, I wonder../cut/…

Certainly a sociable species, sometimes that it works as well as it does because people most of the time mind their own business gets a bit neglected. A reality that can get lost with the enthusiasm and momentum of the emphasis on sociable.

I was more talking about normal than people.

I think most people are good, minding their own business, most of the time. Friendly that way.

transition said:

>http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/conversations/conversations-david-gillespie/8717944

that’d be the chap.

lot of what he said made sense, but trouble is these ideas float around in the aether, to be deferred to in a flash by any tom, dick or mary, sort of instant knowledge, an instant angle, part of normal’s easy-think.

normal’s a bastard too.

Is this the same David Gillespie who has odd and weird ideas about sugar?

Apparently it is the same David Gillespie.

https://www.panmacmillan.com.au/9781743535875/

In the author information. I’m suspicious of people who claim to have enormous knowledge over very broad areas. There are few true polymaths.

Oh, and his training is in law. And he writes on nutrition.

Not impressed here.

buffy said:

Oh, and his training is in law. And he writes on nutrition.

Not impressed here.

heh, lawyers, engineers and physicists, always a little cute when they try medicine/biology.

poikilotherm said:

buffy said:

Oh, and his training is in law. And he writes on nutrition.

Not impressed here.

heh, lawyers, engineers and physicists, always a little cute when they try medicine/biology.

What you talking about?

Medicine is a type of engineering, so doctors are engineers.

The Rev Dodgson said:

poikilotherm said:

buffy said:

Oh, and his training is in law. And he writes on nutrition.

Not impressed here.

heh, lawyers, engineers and physicists, always a little cute when they try medicine/biology.

What you talking about?

Medicine is a type of engineering, so doctors are engineers.

Especially breast enhancement surgeons, building boobies for a better future

The Rev Dodgson said:

poikilotherm said:

buffy said:

Oh, and his training is in law. And he writes on nutrition.

Not impressed here.

heh, lawyers, engineers and physicists, always a little cute when they try medicine/biology.

What you talking about?

Medicine is a type of engineering, so doctors are engineers.

Yea, that’s why a B Civ lets you start doing heart surgery and I call a plumber to fix my bridge design problems.

poikilotherm said:

buffy said:

Oh, and his training is in law. And he writes on nutrition.

Not impressed here.

heh, lawyers, engineers and physicists, always a little cute when they try medicine/biology.

This’d be psychiatry.. but the catch is there is no DSM recognition of psychopathy. The bloke acknowledges that he has no specialist knowledge.

>http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/conversations/conversations-david-gillespie/8717944

half-interesting subject really, and there’s nothing wrong with anyone doing something of a study of the subject (even is not related their specialist fields).

nothing wrong with normal for the most part either.

probably a good starting point re psychopaths is to examine the internal conversations they have, of or related the inhibitory aspects of comparisons they make. Probably find some poverty or/and distortions in that territory.

Ian said:

poikilotherm said:

buffy said:

Oh, and his training is in law. And he writes on nutrition.

Not impressed here.

heh, lawyers, engineers and physicists, always a little cute when they try medicine/biology.

This’d be psychiatry.. but the catch is there is no DSM recognition of psychopathy. The bloke acknowledges that he has no specialist knowledge.

So why would the ABC give him airtime? He makes his money from writing “popular” books, which don’t inform the public.

Ideology and the state have some characteristics of the psychopath. It’s not something subjects are meant to discern. But’s probably true, if one wanted to see it that way, venture the idea for a look. I wouldn’t recommend spending too much time there, just a brief excursion. It yields though some realities. The magic or hoodoo of the social order.

mollwollfumble said:

Yeah, definitely psychopath.

All the rest is window dressing.

I am very very frightened of this person. So much so that I have already shut down my facebook and wish to shut down my Holiday Forum account.

mollwollfumble said:

mollwollfumble said:

Yeah, definitely psychopath.

All the rest is window dressing.

I am very very frightened of this person. So much so that I have already shut down my facebook and wish to shut down my Holiday Forum account.

not good, thought you’d be immune to crazy after some time here, but must be a different shade of crazy :-)

Is this person physically threatening you?