4 ms·

The article mentions just that: yes, it is a controversial diagnosis among psychologists and psychiatrists. However, the point of the article is that data is a

by azakai 11y ago

The article mentions just that: yes, it is a controversial diagnosis among psychologists and psychiatrists. However, the point of the article is that data is accumulating that shows that DID can manifest in ways we can measure on brain scans. It's not just that this woman says she can't see, the brain scans confirm her visual cortex is not active in some of her personalities. That is strong evidence that the popular opinion about psychologists, that you mention, may be wrong.

openasocket 11y ago
This is a very interesting find, though there are alternative explanations. People "losing" their sight due to a psychological condition has been documented for a very long time. In fact, I believe Freud treated a women with so-called hysterical blindness. Hysteria (now called conversion disorder) has been documented to cause these kinds of symptoms, and often the symptoms are intermittent and are brought on by emotional stress. It's possible that this person has borderline personality disorder and conversion disorder. Though I don't know if there are any cases of someone having both, it makes some sense that they would be co-occurring. All that said, is there really that much difference between a person who genuinely believes and acts like they have DID and someone who "really" has DID? If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc... I suppose the evidence that would really win me over would be someone designing a novel therapy or medication which helps people with DID, but is not effective on people with borderline personality disorder or similar conditions. Because at that point the label actually becomes useful.
- azakai 11y ago
  I don't think hysterical blindness is an alternative explanation. It's what's going on here, but, it happens in just one personality. That the different personalities can have entirely separate conditions like hysterical blindness is very strong support for the separate identities being in fact separate. In addition, the fact that brain scans confirm the psychological/hysterical blindness actually happens at a neurological level as well, proves this isn't a case of malingering or of a high-level psychological disorder. This is happening at the lowest brain level we are aware of. Even with that evidence, I suppose one can still ask "but are they 'really' separate personalities"? And I think you're right that if it quacks like a duck and so forth, we might as well call it a duck. Another perspective: if we saw those personalities on different physical people - very distinct, both psychologically and neurologically - we would have no problem accepting them as different people. The only challenge here is that they occur in the same physical person. Perhaps that's not reason enough to dismiss them as separate.
  - openasocket 11y ago
    You have it backwards: all of her personalities were blind, and then the sight returned for one of them. With therapy, now only two personalities still experience blindness. The fact that her episodes of hysterical blindness coincide with the so-called transition to specific personalities is interesting, but not definitive. Even if we accept DID as a legitimate condition, that doesn't mean these separate personalities are real entities in their own right. On of the patients personalities is a 13 year old boy, with all the memories of a 13 year old boy. But these memories are completely false: they did not actually occur. People with DID don't have multiple selves, they have no self at all: their personality is shattered and stitched together by a patchwork of delusions and artificial personality traits.
    - azakai 11y ago
      > You have it backwards: all of her personalities were blind, and then the sight returned for one of them. We are saying the same thing. Some of the personalities are neurologically (not just psychologically) blind, some are not. That's a fascinating result, and certainly suggests that the different personalities are distinct not just psychologically but also at a far deeper level. > People with DID don't have multiple selves, they have no self at all It's not clear that your description and the article's are not the same, except for a preference for calling the same state "multiple selves" vs "no self." Both descriptions agree that something "shattered", and both agree that neurologically the split shards/personalities are remarkably distinct, on every level. I don't think there is a disagreement here.
      - openasocket 11y ago
        On a second reading, you're absolutely right. My bad!

by azakai 11y ago

openasocket 11y ago

This is a very interesting find, though there are alternative explanations. People "losing" their sight due to a psychological condition has been documented for a very long time. In fact, I believe Freud treated a women with so-called hysterical blindness. Hysteria (now called conversion disorder) has been documented to cause these kinds of symptoms, and often the symptoms are intermittent and are brought on by emotional stress. It's possible that this person has borderline personality disorder and conversion disorder. Though I don't know if there are any cases of someone having both, it makes some sense that they would be co-occurring. All that said, is there really that much difference between a person who genuinely believes and acts like they have DID and someone who "really" has DID? If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc... I suppose the evidence that would really win me over would be someone designing a novel therapy or medication which helps people with DID, but is not effective on people with borderline personality disorder or similar conditions. Because at that point the label actually becomes useful.

azakai 11y ago
I don't think hysterical blindness is an alternative explanation. It's what's going on here, but, it happens in just one personality. That the different personalities can have entirely separate conditions like hysterical blindness is very strong support for the separate identities being in fact separate. In addition, the fact that brain scans confirm the psychological/hysterical blindness actually happens at a neurological level as well, proves this isn't a case of malingering or of a high-level psychological disorder. This is happening at the lowest brain level we are aware of. Even with that evidence, I suppose one can still ask "but are they 'really' separate personalities"? And I think you're right that if it quacks like a duck and so forth, we might as well call it a duck. Another perspective: if we saw those personalities on different physical people - very distinct, both psychologically and neurologically - we would have no problem accepting them as different people. The only challenge here is that they occur in the same physical person. Perhaps that's not reason enough to dismiss them as separate.
- openasocket 11y ago
  You have it backwards: all of her personalities were blind, and then the sight returned for one of them. With therapy, now only two personalities still experience blindness. The fact that her episodes of hysterical blindness coincide with the so-called transition to specific personalities is interesting, but not definitive. Even if we accept DID as a legitimate condition, that doesn't mean these separate personalities are real entities in their own right. On of the patients personalities is a 13 year old boy, with all the memories of a 13 year old boy. But these memories are completely false: they did not actually occur. People with DID don't have multiple selves, they have no self at all: their personality is shattered and stitched together by a patchwork of delusions and artificial personality traits.
  - azakai 11y ago
    > You have it backwards: all of her personalities were blind, and then the sight returned for one of them. We are saying the same thing. Some of the personalities are neurologically (not just psychologically) blind, some are not. That's a fascinating result, and certainly suggests that the different personalities are distinct not just psychologically but also at a far deeper level. > People with DID don't have multiple selves, they have no self at all It's not clear that your description and the article's are not the same, except for a preference for calling the same state "multiple selves" vs "no self." Both descriptions agree that something "shattered", and both agree that neurologically the split shards/personalities are remarkably distinct, on every level. I don't think there is a disagreement here.
    - openasocket 11y ago
      On a second reading, you're absolutely right. My bad!