A Misdirection of the DSM and Psychological community in Regards to Sadism? Social Vs Sexual arousals.

[JohnSSM]

14 minutes ago, Area54 said:

The wrangle over DSM definitions has caught my attention on several occassions on several forums over several years.

Yes, that is a huge point.  The DSM provides the official diagnosis of disorders, and when the behaviors require treatment.  It is not a guide for all psychological perspectives, but a guide for therapists and counselors.  Being in the psychological research community for many years, most researchers and theorists know that the DSM is a mess and has always been a mess.  So it's really not all that useful to use it to discuss anything other than how psychology has seen fit to classify these disorders.

So, as a researcher, I have arguments against how the DSM makes adjustments over time.  Sadism used to be a personality disorder, based on deriving pleasure from hurting others.  But they moved sadism into paraphilic (sexually obsessive) disorders, totally missing the point that sadism is not only about sexual arousal.  It is arousing without adding an element of sexual intimacy.  So, now there is no personality disorder to officially classify people who enjoy being mean as a means to arousal, which does not influence their sexual arousal.

But I thought I made that all clear in the OP.

Edited March 24, 2021 by JohnSSM

[Area54]

34 minutes ago, JohnSSM said:

But I thought I made that all clear in the OP.

Your modus operandi appears to be thinking you have made yourself clear. If you had posted this:

 

35 minutes ago, JohnSSM said:

The DSM provides the official diagnosis of disorders, and when the behaviors require treatment.  It is not a guide for all psychological perspectives, but a guide for therapists and counselors.  Being in the psychological research community for many years, most researchers and theorists know that the DSM is a mess and has always been a mess.  So it's really not all that useful to use it to discuss anything other than how psychology has seen fit to classify these disorders.

you would have answered my question and we could have proceeded to the next step.

Off-Topic: You are seemingly educated, intelligent, literate and well informed in certain fields; ideal as a member of the forum. Unfortunately you have an aggressive, arrogant posting style that is likely not making you any friends. (sarcasm/ If only I was more familiar with DSM I could take stab at what your problem is. /sarcasm) Up to you whether or not you do something about it. I'll take you off Ignore in a month to see if you tried.

 

[JohnSSM]

51 minutes ago, Area54 said:

Your modus operandi appears to be thinking you have made yourself clear. If you had posted this:

Can you not point out directly the things I say which are not clear to you?  If I knew very little about complex physics, and I came into a thread doubting what the other person says, on what measure do I have to doubt them?  Wouldnt I have to show the proof I have for doubting them?   I could come into a thread that says "E=mc2 is true and valid".  And I could say, no it's not, go read about this to learn why I see it that way, and I provide some link.  Isnt it up to me, as the doubter to show where my doubts are and not just say, you make no sense?

 I could explain economics to any person who doesn't understand it, and they can say, I doubt what you say or you make no sense.  How much of economics theory do I need to lay down (make law) to prove what I am building from is correct with this person who doesnt have that knowledge?  Isnt it up to them to educate themselves on a topic, only enter if they have some interest in the topic, and can make specific doubts about the topic if they have them?  

51 minutes ago, Area54 said:

you would have answered my question and we could have proceeded to the next step.

At this point, I can honestly say, I dont now what question you are referring to.  

Can you present your interest in the topic, and make specific doubts about the topic if you have them?  And at this point, I need to ask for references on your psychological perspectives in regards to the topic and the OP.  

Was your interest in this discussion based on anything in the OP?  Or did you just come in here to cause trouble and hijack? 

Edited March 24, 2021 by JohnSSM

[iNow]

3 hours ago, JohnSSM said:

It is you who does not comprehend. 

Perhaps I am misunderstanding. I’m happy to acknowledge that. It would be helpful if perhaps you might acknowledge the possibility of misunderstanding on your side, as well (for if this isn’t a simple misunderstanding, then the only other possibility is you’re here arguing in bad faith). 

By way of example, your OP seemed to highlight gaps in the existing models and frameworks used in modern psychology. Specifically, I was replying to these comments from you:

19 hours ago, JohnSSM said:

So, to me, it seems they simply missed the difference between a sexual and social arousal. <...> It seems the psychological community may have overlooked some perspectives 

It’s not unreasonable to suggest you’re attempting to highlight gaps in current approaches. Comments like “they simply missed” and “overlooked” led directly to my summary that your OP is highlighting gaps. For convenience, here again is exactly what I said:

19 hours ago, iNow said:

I also encourage you (if you haven’t already) to consider the ways the framework of psychopathy fairly neatly fills the various gaps you assert and cite. 

That’s all. “Hey... if you haven’t already, maybe consider that those gaps are already filled by other phenomena, something like psychopathy.”

Yet despite your contention that you’re not miscomprehending, that somehow led to these responses:

17 hours ago, JohnSSM said:

You stated there were gaps in my theory <...> it was about my theory, and you state there are gaps

3 hours ago, JohnSSM said:

The gap you claim my theory is trying to fill is still an unknown here.  You haven't presented any reason why I had gaps in the first place. 

As you can see, you’ve misunderstood my comment. My mention of gaps had nothing to do with your “theory.” Your misunderstanding is obvious by how you’re responding.
 

A similar exchange too place when I said psychopathy is an identifier. Specifically, I said this:

18 hours ago, iNow said:

Psychopathy is accepted in the DSM5 and also by the American Psychological Association as a specifier or type of clinical antisocial personality disorder. 

17 hours ago, iNow said:

Section III of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) includes a psychopathy specifier.

That’s what I said above... it’s a specifier of ASPD

Another way of saying this is that it’s a subtype. However, despite your claims that you’re not misreading me, this is how you responded:

17 hours ago, JohnSSM said:

there is no evidence that P leads to ASPD or vice versa <...> You are essentially claiming that every mean person is a psychopath. <...> I had to argue with another guy that ASPD and P arent the same thing. 

I’ll close by highlighting that you’re experience here has been rather consistent across topics and across posters, with some already placing you on their ignore list and other threads of yours getting locked due to bad faith argumentation.

It’s certainly your right to believe everyone is out to get you, that they take pleasure in interrupting your threads, and that the moderators are looking past what you see as blatant transgressions of senior members and singling you out for punishment, or... you might consider that you are misreading comments from others, and that the one consistent variable in all of this is YOU.

I’m not optimistic you will, but perhaps some self reflection about your current attitude and considerations about your current posting style might provide you and all of us here with a better more enjoyable experience. Even a cursory review of your posts shows how plainly comments like the below are false:

18 hours ago, JohnSSM said:

Im not being aggressive or anti-social at all.

Edited March 24, 2021 by iNow
Fixed quote attribution

[JohnSSM]

3 minutes ago, iNow said:

Perhaps I am misunderstanding. I’m happy to acknowledge that. It would be helpful if perhaps you might acknowledge the possibility of misunderstanding on your side, as well (for if this isn’t a simple misunderstanding, then the only other possibility is you’re here arguing in bad faith). 

I really feel like you try to manipulate every point.  

The doubts you had in my topic have been disproved.  Do you have a any other interest in my topic, or doubts that I am correct in my perspective?  If so, I would love to know what they are very specifically.  It will take effort on your part to try to understand my perspective, but your incorrect assessment of the gaps in my model have been proved incorrect.  We can assume that you now agree with the OP, unless you present any other doubts you have.  Thanks!

[iNow]

1 minute ago, JohnSSM said:

your incorrect assessment of the gaps in my model

LOL. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. 

[JohnSSM]

Unless you address your doubts in this topic, i believe anything else you say is hijacking this thread, and I feel you have been hijacking from the first minute you got to this thread.  My proof lays very secure in the record of this conversation, your inability to acknowledge that your point was incorrect, as implied, and he fact that you'd rather talk about me.

[iNow]

Just now, JohnSSM said:

I feel you have been hijacking from the first minute you got to this thread.

I’m very sorry to hear that. Have you considered reporting my posts?

[JohnSSM]

1 minute ago, iNow said:

LOL. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. 

Ive already proved that psychopathy does not account for the gaps you alluded to in my thoery.  The only one repeating is you as you repeat your hijacking of this thread.

Just now, iNow said:

I’m very sorry to hear that. Have you considered reporting my posts?

No, i dont run to mommy.  Do you?  

[studiot]

1 hour ago, JohnSSM said:

Yes, that is a huge point.  The DSM provides the official diagnosis of disorders, and when the behaviors require treatment.  It is not a guide for all psychological perspectives, but a guide for therapists and counselors.  Being in the psychological research community for many years, most researchers and theorists know that the DSM is a mess and has always been a mess.  So it's really not all that useful to use it to discuss anything other than how psychology has seen fit to classify these disorders.

One thing you can say for the Laws of Physics.  They hold good in China as well as California.

The DSM doesn't hold in most places ouside the US.

In fact in the short series of lectures I attended they took pains to point out its shortcomings.

[JohnSSM]

Do you doubt that the moderators have been watching this conversation?  They see exactly what you're doing as I do.  They could step in if they chose, but they don't.  Im totally fine with that.  I can handle just about every disorder in the book.  But lets face it.  These disordered behaviors are within every human, and I have to deal with them all the time. If you want to go on doing as youre doing, I will examine your behaviors as you do it.  I learn from every post you make.  

Just now, studiot said:

In fact in the short series of lectures I attended they took pains to point out its shortcomings.

Thats the point of this topic.  Showing one of the shortcomings.  There are many others, but this discussion has been a nightmare.

[iNow]

5 minutes ago, JohnSSM said:

Ive already proved that psychopathy does not account for the gaps you alluded to in my thoery. 

Facepalm 

[JohnSSM]

1 minute ago, iNow said:

Facepalm 

Your maturity level is very low.   You have provided proof of it over and over.  What that means is your brain never found the ordered model that is was supposed to create.  That growth and learning process never became mature, complete, or final, and it leaves you with a disordered brain, which leads to your maturity disorder.  Im sorry for your loss.

IS there anyone here who has an interest in psychology, or is it all physics guys who know very little about psychology besides what they've learned through pop culture and movies, who followed me here to harass me because of posts from the physics forum?  Yikes...I thought this forum was run by good people.

[iNow]

46 minutes ago, JohnSSM said:

Do you doubt that the moderators have been watching this conversation?  They see exactly what you're doing as I do.  They could step in if they chose, but they don't. 

I’m uncertain. Neither of us knows what moderators are and are not seeing. This is why there’s a report post function. It highlights issues to their attention in case they’ve not already witnessed them directly.

It’s disingenuous at best to berate the moderators in one breath for not taking action against participants in your threads then to refuse in the next breath to use the mechanism which highlights problematic posts to them or to dismiss such actions as “crying to mommy.”

 

41 minutes ago, JohnSSM said:

Instead of calling mommy to tell them that youre being mean, anti-social and aggressive, why don't you just admit it, and leave me alone. <...> 

see the obviousness of your anti-social and anti-truth plans. <...> 

right now, im going to every physics thread to ask why I could care about physics.  I want to be like you.  I want to have the power to ruin other people's threads with nonsense questions about caring.  You are a role model. <...>

No, i dont run to mommy.  Do you?  <...>

Im tired of the uneducated person mocking me.  Enjoy your exploration.<...>

That has to be the dumbest stream of ideas I've seen for a long time.  Im sure you are a fabulous person, but your ideas are just stupid.<...>

The language I use is very clear, although it may be more complex sentence structures than you are used to <...>

You have no idea about the depths of my knowledge or how intelligent I am. <...>  It makes you feel comfortable and powerful to suppose that I am just overestimating my own intelligence <...>

Your maturity level is very low.   <...> your brain never found the ordered model that is was supposed to create.  That growth and learning process never became mature, complete, or final, and it leaves you with a disordered brain, which leads to your maturity disorder. 

*The comments above include some quotes from other recent threads, but most are from this one within just the past 24 hours

 

Edited March 24, 2021 by iNow

[JohnSSM]

8 minutes ago, iNow said:

I’m uncertain. Neither of us knows what moderators are and are not seeing. This is why there’s a report post function. It highlights issues to their attention in case they’ve not already witnessed them directly.

It’s disingenuous at best to berate the moderators in one breath for not taking action against participants in your threads then to refuse in the next breath to use the mechanism which highlights problematic posts to them or to dismiss such actions as “crying to mommy.”

 

*The comments above include some quotes from other recent threads, but most are from this one within just the past 24 hours

 

Well, I didnt tell you that I allready notified the moderators, using the report features.  When you don't know all the information, you really look like a fool.  It's a valuable lesson to learn, for us all.

I ran to mommy, and mommy didnt help.  Ill probably grow up to have personality disorders. Hehe

[iNow]

55 minutes ago, JohnSSM said:

Well, I didnt tell you that I allready notified the moderators, using the report features.  When you don't know all the information, you really look like a fool.  It's a valuable lesson to learn, for us all.

I ran to mommy, and mommy didnt help.  Ill probably grow up to have personality disorders. Hehe

Perhaps they disagreed with your assessment, reviewed the post you reported and decided it didn’t break site rules or violent standards of civility. 

[studiot]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Perhaps they disagreed with your assessment, reviewed the post you reported and decided it didn’t break site rules or violent standards of civility. 

 

Did you hear the one about a psychologist ? She joined a Science club and was obnoxious about Science just to laugh at the mayhem she could cause.

Goodnight all it's past the witching hour here.

Edited March 25, 2021 by studiot

[JohnSSM]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Perhaps they disagreed with your assessment, reviewed the post you reported and decided it didn’t break site rules or violent standards of civility. 

Yes, and with no response to my inquiry, I am left to wonder if they care that you have been ruining this thread purposefully since you arrived.  So keep it up...I enjoy it.  Its very hard to run me out of a conversation.

44 minutes ago, studiot said:

Did you hear the one about a psychologist ? She joined a Science club and was obnoxious about Science just to laugh at the mayhem she could cause.

Goodnight all it's past the witching hour here.

Did you hear the one about the physicist?  Spent all his time learning about math, thought it gave him some power for subjective insight into everything, and looked like a fool in the psychology forum.  Its pretty funny too.

[JohnSSM]

This post is not a speculation.  Sadistic personality disorder was removed from the DSM.  There is no other disorder which directly expresses a pleasure in hurting others which isn't linked to sexual or paraphilic arousals.  Which means, the behavior of enjoying hurting others, for non sexual reasons is no longer attributed to any disorder, so we all get to go on calling these people bullies, instead of obvious sadists.  None of that is speculative and is based on the reality that modern psychology has brought to the DSM.

[iNow]

2 minutes ago, JohnSSM said:

disorder which directly expresses a pleasure in hurting others

Is this a journey of self exploration for you? 

[JohnSSM]

1 minute ago, iNow said:

Is this a journey of self exploration for you? 

When you studied whatever interested you, was it self exploration?  YOU can actually use your own motivations to understand how others were motivated.

im not the one hijacking a topic.  I am explaining the topic.  You havent been able to explain the topic at all.  But still, I learn from you.

You cant even understand the terms in the topic, or the others terms of psychology, and you still ramble on like you know something.

If you want to know the truth, my father was a brilliant man who became an early computer engineer, after WW2 in New York.  He was brilliant with math, but still could not understand very very complex math, but enough to develop to work on fortran for 10 years before it was finally released as a programming language.  He also could not understand complex emotions at all, and was a disordered man who was very neglectful.  He idolized Ayn Rand if that tells you anything.  No emotional value for other humans at all.  So I was his brilliant son, who excelled in math until i was about 13, when I decided that Ayn Rand had no understanding of humans, and neither did my mathematician father.  I didnt want to follow my father.  So I took his brilliance, which I do seem to have retained, and used it to examine behavior from a very scientific perspective.  That is why I know more than you and have more info to create models than you in psychology, psychiatry and neuropsychology than you.  Its where we put our energy.  No biggy.

I read Atlas Shrugged at 13 and understood it all much better than dear old mathematician dad.  I must be dumber than him.

[iNow]

“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged.One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."

[JohnSSM]

“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged.One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."

Ha, very good.  At least we can now enjoy your wit together.  I do know humor, I just dont mix it much when Im serious about a subject.  Thats a good one.

I read them both and became  power obsessed, who gives no shit about others, mixed with dungeons and dragons and dangerous delusions of granduer.  I dont need those now.  I studied for 40 years after that to figure it all out.  

What i needed was a caring father.  I had to invent security to fill in the gaps.  That is a personality disorder, of course.  

[iNow]

6 minutes ago, JohnSSM said:

What i needed was a caring father.  I had to invent security to fill in the gaps. 

Very sorry to hear that. Also, very sorry to point out that security is not the only thing you’ve been inventing since joining this community. 

[JohnSSM]

Fatherless kids is now a specifier for ASPD.  Always has been.  But I have no psychopathic traits.  None.  I cant charm anyone, no one likes me.  I cant manipulate people.  I cant even get you to believe I have an expert perspective of psychology!  haha.  I have a past of anti social traits, and none from psychopathy.  If something drove me to kill, it would be my ASPD, not my psychopathy.   There are plenty of non psychopathic, masterminds, who went on killing for years because they were just anti socials with a drive to hurt.    I dont lie, I dont have to exaggerate my own points, and Im not engaging in any of the head gams you try to tempt me with.  I am a well adjusted anti social.  Recovered anti social.    And now, with honesty, I can spot anti social behavior quicker than you could make up that bullshit about psychopathy fillings the gaps in my topic.

5 minutes ago, iNow said:

Very sorry to hear that. Also, very sorry to point out that security is not the only thing you’ve been inventing since joining this community. 

Ad Hominem...say hi to Ayn Rand in your dreams.