4 ms·

You are very very right. When people have disorders like you list they are disabling. That's expensive for the worker and the employer and ultimately our socia

You are very very right. When people have disorders like you list they are disabling. That's expensive for the worker and the employer and ultimately our social systems but it's just kind of expected that those people are forgotten with no resources but their own to cope. That's a horrible broken system. What scares me is the undiagnosed (as you pointed out). There's way too many people in public perception that when analyzed closely have some kind of personality disorder. Not to play psychobabble but way too often these disorders are recognized for the success they provide but the destructive aspects are ignored. Some of these people have been so successful that they'll die untreated and it's a loss for them and everyone else. Jobs had something wrong with him that he appears to have recognized and mitigated over time. Trump has something wrong with him, he'll never get treated. There are some other popular figures that are less controversial but in the same boat. Straight up sociopathic behavior that is applauded until enough people get hurt. Then you've got the unsuccessful delusional people who end up committing mass murder. How many shootings and terrorist attacks could have been prevented through relatively cheap mental healthcare? It seems like an obvious weak point in society that we don't really address. Worse, you gotta wonder if social media is exacerbating it in some people. It's easy to become a delusional narcissist these days. Maybe it always has been?

curun1r 9y ago
> Trump has something wrong with him, he'll never get treated A bit off-topic, but in case you're interested in that 'something', here's one analysis from a psychologist that made the rounds of liberal psychologists that my mother associates with: http://www.nationalmemo.com/psychoanalyzing-donald-trump/ http://www.nationalmemo.com/psychoanalyzing-donald-trump/
- aaron-lebo 9y ago
  That was really interesting, thanks.
- pdeuchler 9y ago
  Please stop sharing that tripe. The author himself admits it's horribly unethical and overwhelmingly likely to be entirely wrong in the very first paragraph, but somehow justifies his continued speculation because a random group of peers (as if these peers being located within the grounds of Yale for a conference gives them some sort of authority) decided it was okay this one time because they don't like the subject in question. If you truly care about creating political change and/or defeating Trump you'll focus on policies that the majority of the electorate are willing to vote for instead of sharing feel good tabloid pablum to justify your superiority complex.
  - qb45 9y ago
    Not only that, they are basically turning this whole mental health thing into a farce.
SirensOfTitan 9y ago
Two dangers around this perspective seem evident to me: 1. Diagnosing others based on second hand information. Presumably not as a professional either. 2. Attempting to define right and "wrong" behavior in a psychological context. On (1): you experience a vast minority of Trump's or Job's life (unless you know them personally). How can you possibly hold to those claims? You have no idea how either of them acted in non-public contexts. On (2): I would assume that establishing a proper range for "sanity" sits as one of the larger difficulties around the psychological field of study (although I do not know). Too narrow of a definition and you risk identifying everyone with something wrong. Too wide and you risk alienating those who could benefit from some kind of help. I completely agree with your categorization of mental health services as a "weak point" in society largely unaddressed. With that, I think individuals need to exhibit care throwing around 'diagnoses' casually outside of a proper psychological context.
- aaron-lebo 9y ago
  There's plenty of material out on the personal lives of Jobs and Trump. Steve exhibited a range of very odd behavior and some of it was clearly detrimental (see how he denied his paternity to the point of delusion). If we can't call that bad behavior than we have no stance on proper morals. Trump also projects as someone with a personality disorder. We have plenty of material to suggest that his behavior is in fact unhealthy and detrimental. My point wasn't to diagnose those two (you'll notice I did not), but to point out just two individuals which have signs of personality disorder. They may not in fact have any disorders, but how many Jobs wannabes do and that kind of behavior is not just tolerated but celebrated? That context is a real enabler for people with disorders.
  - fasquoika 9y ago
    By claiming that public figures can be diagnosed by someone who doesn't know them personally, I get the impression you have no idea what is actually involved in a psychological diagnosis. For example, many mental health issues can be the result of physical health issues. In such cases the mental effects are considered part of the physical illness and a separate mental diagnosis is not given. This means that someone's full medical history is necessary for a diagnosis of mental illness. Clinical psychology isn't just running around throwing diagnoses at people who seem sufficiently "crazy", there's lots of specific rules. To get a sense of what is actually required for a diagnosis, reading sections of the DSM-V is invaluable. Here's a link: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_xpcySB9uWfejF1S0xlLU95Y2M/edit https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_xpcySB9uWfejF1S0xlLU95Y2M/...

curun1r 9y ago

> Trump has something wrong with him, he'll never get treated A bit off-topic, but in case you're interested in that 'something', here's one analysis from a psychologist that made the rounds of liberal psychologists that my mother associates with: http://www.nationalmemo.com/psychoanalyzing-donald-trump/ http://www.nationalmemo.com/psychoanalyzing-donald-trump/

aaron-lebo 9y ago
That was really interesting, thanks.
pdeuchler 9y ago
Please stop sharing that tripe. The author himself admits it's horribly unethical and overwhelmingly likely to be entirely wrong in the very first paragraph, but somehow justifies his continued speculation because a random group of peers (as if these peers being located within the grounds of Yale for a conference gives them some sort of authority) decided it was okay this one time because they don't like the subject in question. If you truly care about creating political change and/or defeating Trump you'll focus on policies that the majority of the electorate are willing to vote for instead of sharing feel good tabloid pablum to justify your superiority complex.
- qb45 9y ago
  Not only that, they are basically turning this whole mental health thing into a farce.

SirensOfTitan 9y ago

Two dangers around this perspective seem evident to me: 1. Diagnosing others based on second hand information. Presumably not as a professional either. 2. Attempting to define right and "wrong" behavior in a psychological context. On (1): you experience a vast minority of Trump's or Job's life (unless you know them personally). How can you possibly hold to those claims? You have no idea how either of them acted in non-public contexts. On (2): I would assume that establishing a proper range for "sanity" sits as one of the larger difficulties around the psychological field of study (although I do not know). Too narrow of a definition and you risk identifying everyone with something wrong. Too wide and you risk alienating those who could benefit from some kind of help. I completely agree with your categorization of mental health services as a "weak point" in society largely unaddressed. With that, I think individuals need to exhibit care throwing around 'diagnoses' casually outside of a proper psychological context.

aaron-lebo 9y ago
There's plenty of material out on the personal lives of Jobs and Trump. Steve exhibited a range of very odd behavior and some of it was clearly detrimental (see how he denied his paternity to the point of delusion). If we can't call that bad behavior than we have no stance on proper morals. Trump also projects as someone with a personality disorder. We have plenty of material to suggest that his behavior is in fact unhealthy and detrimental. My point wasn't to diagnose those two (you'll notice I did not), but to point out just two individuals which have signs of personality disorder. They may not in fact have any disorders, but how many Jobs wannabes do and that kind of behavior is not just tolerated but celebrated? That context is a real enabler for people with disorders.
- fasquoika 9y ago
  By claiming that public figures can be diagnosed by someone who doesn't know them personally, I get the impression you have no idea what is actually involved in a psychological diagnosis. For example, many mental health issues can be the result of physical health issues. In such cases the mental effects are considered part of the physical illness and a separate mental diagnosis is not given. This means that someone's full medical history is necessary for a diagnosis of mental illness. Clinical psychology isn't just running around throwing diagnoses at people who seem sufficiently "crazy", there's lots of specific rules. To get a sense of what is actually required for a diagnosis, reading sections of the DSM-V is invaluable. Here's a link: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_xpcySB9uWfejF1S0xlLU95Y2M/edit https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_xpcySB9uWfejF1S0xlLU95Y2M/...