[HN Gopher] The Schizoid Difference ___________________________________________________________________ The Schizoid Difference Author : memorable Score : 82 points Date : 2022-10-03 14:54 UTC (8 hours ago) (HTM) web link (eden.bearblog.dev) (TXT) w3m dump (eden.bearblog.dev) | phkahler wrote: | >> this boundary will always exist, regardless of the amount of | therapy, or effort, that is placed upon it. despite the | psychological community, or family or friends or partners that | could attempt to help. | | That boundary can be significantly moved or even torn down. | Psychologists often don't really understand how to help, so they | either ignore it or do other things that may or may not work (or | may be harmful). IMHO more writings are needed from those who | have made significant improvement in this condition, the | clinicians understanding is either too abstract or not correct | (SPD is not same as AvPD for example). | [deleted] | hackerlight wrote: | What should be done to treat it? | kiicia wrote: | That's the neat part, you don't. | | Source: I'm decades old, somewhere between SzPD and AvPD. | Still officially undiagnosed and not treated for it, despite | of years of psychiatrical treatment... I just get | antidepressants and anti-generalized-fear drugs (dunno what | is proper name) and I'm left alone (literally). | hackerlight wrote: | Does having a partner imply not having SzPD? Like would | that be sufficient for someone to not qualify for a | diagnosis. | PuppyTailWags wrote: | No, you can have SzPD and also a life partner. It can be | as easy as getting married due to societal pressure, | going with the flow of a relationship can often be | significantly easier than fighting off questions about | being a permanent single person. Relationships don't have | to be lovely, loving things of deep attachment. They can | also be points of stability, pooling resources, and | taking advantage of societal carve-outs. | 2devnull wrote: | Must be a wonderful experience for the other person! | Being someone's point of stability for "societal carve- | outs" instead of having your love and affection | reciprocated. | PuppyTailWags wrote: | I mean, the other person might also just need a point of | stability and can otherwise get much of their social | enrichment elsewhere. Your partner can just be a person | you get along with that you live with like a good buddy | that you might have sex with (if you enjoy sex). Your | partner doesn't have to be your spiritual guru, your | therapist, your life coach, your obsession, your reason | to live, etc. | | It's not like Schizoid people go around sneakily | pretending to love people only to turn off once the | relationship is secured. Like any healthy relationship, | open communication is expected. A schizoid person can | simply say, "hey, I can't have a Hallmark Movie marriage" | and their partner can just accept that. Maybe the partner | is schizoid too. Maybe the relationship is an open one. | Maybe the capacity to meet a schizoid person where they | are is, in fact, the deep emotional validation that they | share with each other that is the bedrock to the | partnership (the schizoid person is _finally_ accepted | and can let down their guard a little, the partner gets | an insight into their schizoid lover that no one else | ever sees and revels in the intimacy and beauty of it). | There are an infinite number of ways to have two adults | enter an emotionally healthy relationship even if one of | them is neurodivergent. | brnaftr361 wrote: | I don't necessarily believe it would be impossible to | reciprocate, but that there would be an atypical | representation of love and needs disparate to what | culture has inculcated (which itself leads to many | misapprehensions). | | Depending on the literature chosen, SzPDs can have | "lively internal states" and be "exquisitely sensitive" | it's just a question of expressing such things. | kayodelycaon wrote: | Context, I'm bipolar, not SzPD, so may not fully | understand. | | Relationships don't need to be based on love. You could | seek out someone who is looking for someone to share | responsibilities with. Imagine them as a coworker or | roommate. | | If the relationship works well, you might want to | formalize it to get the societal benefits marriage can | provide. | | Most people can't imagine this working out because they | don't want or function well in that kind of relationship. | trash3 wrote: | Schizoid can be a good partner if compatible. They need | solitude though otherwise are significantly more stable | than most. | | A diagnosis proper would require brain mapping. My theory | is there is a missing piece of circuitry like a bridge in | the reward network of the brain. | arbitrage wrote: | Probably doesn't rule it out outright. It would depend on | the level of relationship attachment. | GoblinSlayer wrote: | Treatment follows diagnosis, "omnipotent barrier" is a | shallow diagnosis. Once the nature of the barrier is known, | solution should be fairly obvious. | tcrisco wrote: | I have placed myself in therapy dozens of times up until now. | Ultimately nothing has ever worked out up to now. There was | always something that prevented further introspection, like the | author describes. I am not sure that it is surmountable. Past | therapists have told me that my relationship with them was not | viable. | | At some point I only went to therapy on someone else's | insistence. At some other point I realized that I was only ever | in therapy because I was terrified of those other people's eyes | on me, insisting that I go or I can't reasonably integrate with | their company based on becoming a person changed to their | expectations. When I realized that, I lost interest entirely. I | also reported my experiences with therapy to the other party, | and predictably, they shunned me. | | So there were two conclusions I could make: that maybe therapy | isn't ever going to be as effective with me than with an | average person, and that if someone's acceptance of me depends | on my acceptance of therapy, then they are a lost cause. | | At the same time, I can understand such a response. There are | probably hundreds of comments on this site directed towards | depressed engineers and others where the advice essentially | amounts to "go to therapy." What would those people say if your | response was "no, it doesn't work?" But the fact is, it doesn't | work. At the same time, common sense surrounding therapy is too | strong a force to be reckoned with on an average advice thread, | and the culture is not going to overturn it. So your only | option is to stay quiet, and be left alone. | | This I think is one example of the "boundary" that the author | describes, in trying to address that boundary with action. | wruza wrote: | In my own experience, therapy works (and I'm not an easy case | either). It's more like not all therapists work, and the | depth of your issues may be too big to even comprehend in a | couple of years. I can't tell for my hardest issues, but | relatively small ones like a bunch of situational anxieties I | successfully fixed. (The great finding was that once I | eliminated the first algorithm, I realized that they are not | situational, but remarkably generic. Lots of thoughts like | "hmm, this is the same pattern, let's give zero fucks and get | new experience in return".) | | It's still a well full of mud nonetheless, but hey I've been | filling it for 35 years. I score around 6/7 on the above | definition, also failed a socialization test. | | I hit the wall a few times too. Questions not responding, | nothing in my head to answer them. This wall is _hard_ , hard | on a level of debugging a binary without any debug info. I | decided to relax a little and just accept and explore | "theories" of my therapist and my own (e.g. just make an | extreme statement about me and accept and therapy _it_ , as | if it was true). Also, some ideas don't work because you may | be trapped between an objective situation and your core | character. While unsolvable, it e.g. gave me ~1.5x raise and | benefits as a result. Nice. Also, when in a complete dead | end, I just went on a session anyway and "started a new | thread". Most of them merged eventually in surprising ways | and gave more clarity on previous ones. | | I wish you to find what works for you eventually, if you are | willing to continue. | GoblinSlayer wrote: | You don't need to overturn whole culture. See Ash | experiments: conformism has a funny feature - it works only | if there's no disagreement. One disagreement can be enough to | instill doubt in assumptions. | nmeofthestate wrote: | I'd never heard about this type of disorder until I did one of | those "what personality disorder do you have" and it told me I | had this. After reading up on it I reckon the diagnosis, despite | coming from an internet quiz, was pretty accurate. It seems | virtually invisible compared to the "fashionable" disorders we | hear so much about online, that have vocal advocates and even | clout-chasing tiktok'ers. When I read about treatment, I got the | impression that it's considered to be untreatable and neither | doctors/sufferers not are that bothered. But I wonder if that, | and its "invisibility", isn't to some extent due to the nature of | the problem. | sxp wrote: | The author should have defined the term "schizoid" since it | colloquially refers to Schizophrenia rather than Schizoid | Personality Disorder. The former involves hallucinations and is | also a pejorative used to imply that someone is "crazy". The | latter is an extreme form of introversion: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoid_personality_disorder | | DSM-5 criteria: - Neither desires nor enjoys | close relationships, including being part of a family. - | Almost always chooses solitary activities. - Has little, if | any, interest in having sexual experiences with another person. | - Takes pleasure in few, if any, activities. - Lacks close | friends or confidants other than first-degree relatives. - | Appears indifferent to the praise or criticism of others. - | Shows emotional coldness, detachment, or flattened affectivity. | lofatdairy wrote: | I assumed that it was a reference to D&G's Anti-Oedipus, that | definition seems to make a bit more sense. | [deleted] | rnxrx wrote: | The dilemma with these sorts of discussions always seems to | come back to where the line is drawn between the personality | and the disorder. Clearly there are some pathologies whose | features manifest in ways that are dangerous (..to one's self | and/or others) but it's not clear to me which of the criteria | above rise from being facets of ordinary personalities and | become truly pathological. | | This seems to also coincide with other literature that | describes those with SPD as being among the least likely to | seek treatment. | wooque wrote: | That sounds like advanced depression | uoaei wrote: | I see it as "depression with an onset in early life, probably | from neglectful parenting". | elliotec wrote: | The author did not need to define schizoid because: | | 1. It is their blog, and they probably assume their audience is | educated in what schizoid means or is capable of looking it up. | | 2. Schizoid does not colloquially refer to schizophrenia, and | schizophrenia is not a pejorative for "crazy," these are both | real and distinct (but related) disorders that do not require | anyone talking about them to dichotomize them from what you | might assume people misconstrue their false definitions as. | | Also, it's not an "extreme form of introversion" - it's much | more than that, and putting it that way minimizes the serious | nature of the disorder. | belkarx wrote: | You're incorrect on point 2. In many communities, | schizoid/schizo does refer in a derogatory/shorthand manner | to schizophrenia and many more people are familiar with | schizophrenia than schizoid disorder, so that is more likely | to be the immediate assumption. | kyleyeats wrote: | If you're uncomfortable with the term 'schizoid,' you can try | medicating the heck out of it and calling it ADHD. | hosh wrote: | SPD shares more similarities to Narcissitic Personality | Disorder than it does with ADHD -- not in terms of effect and | imposition on other people, but rather in the lived | experience of self and other, self and world. I don't think | SPD (or NPD) are something you can medicate. | kyleyeats wrote: | They're also kinda opposites. The cure for NPD is isolation | and the cure for SPD is being around people (agreed-- | neither are in pill form yet). They both have immutable | internal status, but the narcissist's is very low while the | schizoid's is very high. | | The best example IMO of a cured narcissist is Larry Lawton, | who faced a long period of isolation in prison. He's on | Youtube. | plutonorm wrote: | Perhaps long acting oxytocin. | hosh wrote: | If we're going that route, I think it's more likely we'll | see clinical outcomes with therupeutic use of psilosybin | or MDMA. | | I don't think it is so much that the brain needs to be | tweaked, but that experiencing self, other, and world in | a different ways can transform those in a way that does | not require ongoing medication. | Cornelius267 wrote: | These are different things. They may share some overlapping | symptoms, perhaps even some similar brain changes, but the | internal phenomenology of them are quite different. They are | not exclusive, but nor are they the same thing. | kyleyeats wrote: | No, they're just different words and different times. | Schizoids have a false mask they use to interact with | others. If we could have, we would have medicated them back | then so that they're always presenting with the false mask | instead of their "wrong" asocial presentation. That's what | ADHD is. We didn't suddenly stop having schizoids and start | having a bunch of ADHD people. | Cornelius267 wrote: | No, they are different things. I am honestly quite | confused as to how you could think that they were the | same thing. They both exist as a constellation of | separate diagnostic criteria, for example, and the | internal phenomenology of both is different. You can have | one, but not the other, or you could have both. | | For example, here's a quora where someone with both talks | about it: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference- | between-ADHD-an... | | Or if you prefer a more 'scientific' source, here's one | examining the comorbidity of ADHD and certain disorders, | among which Schizoid Personality Disorder is one: | https://www.elsevier.es/en-revista-revista-psiquiatria- | salud... | | They find a correlation, yes, but they are certainly not | one and the same. | kyleyeats wrote: | I mean, do you think ADHD is new? Did it just not exist | before 1990 or whenever it was made up? Do you think | _any_ medical condition before then covers what ADHD is | /was? | | Lance Armstrong when he is biking and Lance Armstrong | when he is recovering are not the same either. But Lance | can take drugs to get more of the biking time and less of | the recovering time. This is how SPD and ADHD work. ADHD | is just a medicated false mask that a schizoid person can | maintain for longer periods of time than usual, without | episodes of hermitude to recharge. They're doping. | | Failure to maintain the mask looks like a breakdown in | attention/focus. People do long, focused work because of | the expectations of others. Schizoids don't experience | that, but instead basically run on obsession. They stop | working when that fizzles out. On pills, though, they can | work forever. | | The 'scientific' people serve the people making the pills | and nobody else. They rename everything every few years | to sell more pills. If you want a proper take on SPD, | look up Millon and his subtypes. Most of the "knowledge" | of conditions in the zeitgeist comes from prescription | drug commercials. | PuppyTailWags wrote: | Millon's subtypes of schizoid don't at all resemble ADHD. | Millon's subtypes are: | | * aloof | | * lethargic | | * barren (intellectually) | | * flat | | * complacent or lifeless | | None of these reflect ADHD, which is a dysregulation | disorder resulting in the inability to form socially | expected task-reward feedback loops. This means | forgetting to do small chores once they leave one's sight | even under the strong desire to do those chores, having | strong emotional responses, needing higher levels of | stimulation, and strong sense of impulse. None of ADHD | has anything to do with whether or not one is displaying | apathy or lack of interest in engagement broadly. | | SPD is not a disorder of obsession. You might be thinking | of the related-but-very-different Schizotypal, whose | strange beliefs, sensory disruptions, and emotional | impropriety I can see as potentially looking like ADHD. | Cornelius267 wrote: | I don't think that your assertion makes sense in its own | context. What you are saying is that "SPD" exists, and | "ADHD" is just a modern rebranding of it. But why do you | decide that "SPD" is the spot at which scientists got it | right? Were they free from the corruption that you imply? | | I agree with a general skepticism of the pharmaceutical | industry. I disagree that all of neurology and | pharmacology have been completely subsumed by that | industry. It is not entirely free of it either, but there | is more nuance here than you seem to be allowing. | kyleyeats wrote: | The first prescription drug commercial aired in 1983. I | discard everything after that. | Cornelius267 wrote: | I suppose that's one way to do it. I don't think that it | makes any sense, but you're entitled to it. I do believe, | however, that you are disregarding tens of thousands of | principled researchers who have spent their life on this, | and substituting outdated knowledge for it. | | If you are at all interested in testing your belief, a | highly accessible discussion can be found here: | https://www.alieward.com/ologies/adhd | intelVISA wrote: | I'm rusty but ADHD was HKD (hyperkinetic disorder) in the | olden times and had a much, much tighter criteria pre | DSM-5? Think incident rates in Europe is approx. <2% | under ICD-10 vs >10% in America due to DSM. | | The major diff. iirc was no comorbidity in the case of | HKD. If you were depressed or anxious you couldn't also | have ADHD whereas in America we can just top up | amphetamines with benzos and treat them both. | | Make of that what you will $$. | diputsmonro wrote: | I think you're being overly cynical. Of course over time | as science advances we will recognize more subtle | distinctions between things which we used to perceive as | the same. That's how science works. Just because two | separate things are similar and sometimes found together | doesn't mean they are identical. | | Whether something is a "disorder" or not is somewhat | subjective and opinionated, for sure. But as someone | diagnosed with ADHD, I often find that the expectations | of modern society can be debilitating. Whether the | disorder lies in me or in an unaccommodating society is | an interesting question, but it is a separate one. | kyleyeats wrote: | Please email me and take my personality test! Please. | Y'all are like Bigfoot. You drop a wonderful comment like | this and then disappear into the ether. | | SPD has the worst outcomes of anything in the DSM. Only | someone with SPD could possibly ever see it as the non- | broken state, or as not a disorder. You're exactly the | type of person I'm talking about. Do you _see_ your | vocabulary? Please contact me! I 'm a philosopher working | on a new model and could really use your point of data. | [deleted] | PuppyTailWags wrote: | Schizophrenia also has disaffected response and reduced | emotional affect, btw. Folks who have schizophrenia sometimes | considers this more debilitating than hallucinations, because | they don't respond to antipsychotics. | canjobear wrote: | Background | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoid_personality_disorder | metacritic12 wrote: | I agree that psychologists too readily dismiss people who are | weird as having a disorder. | | Any non-nomrmal behaviour, taken to an extreme, can cause a | disorder in the sense that that person can't function (e.g. to | keep herself fed and employed). This means unless we literally | are the most average person, we all have the starts of a | disorder. It does not mean we have a disorder because it's the | magnitude that makes it a disorder. | | Genuine question: in this case, what is in fact the disorder? | Reading through the description of Schizoid, they like to be | alone, they don't meet people's emotional expectations -- these | don't sound like disorders. | gatonegro wrote: | It's been described as "the personality disorder that lacks a | personality". It's a deficit disorder, because the person | _lacks_ certain traits that you 'd expect to see in a "normal" | person. | | It meets the requirements for a disorder, since it's a | deviation from social norms and can interfere with a person's | life to various degrees. SzPD doesn't get a lot of attention, | so the diagnosis itself isn't desperately well developed. It's | more of a baffling psychological curiosity to many. Something | they don't quite know how to deal with. | GoblinSlayer wrote: | Conformance is personality now? Your normie lens are too | thick. | gatonegro wrote: | I'm talking about a clinical definition of a "personality | disorder". | | _> A personality disorder is a way of thinking, feeling | and behaving that deviates from the expectations of the | culture, causes distress or problems functioning, and lasts | over time.[1]_ | | What I personally think wasn't stated and is not relevant | to my point. | | [1] https://psychiatry.org/patients-families/personality- | disorde... | GoblinSlayer wrote: | First line at your link: | | >Personality is the way of thinking, feeling and behaving | that makes a person different from other people. | | So tell me how SPD lacks a personality. A person without | a personality would be indistinguishable from other | people. | | If you read the definition of SPD, it doesn't quite | satisfy the definition of disorder, nothing there implies | distress or problems. Deviations are expected alright, | because people are different. Seems to not care? It's not | an expectation of the culture that you're entitled to be | relevant everywhere, you're relevant only where you | earned it, and care about praise is deeply personal. | q-big wrote: | > Genuine question: in this case, what is in fact the disorder? | | To quote from Appendix B of the Jargon file | (http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/weaknesses.html): | | "Many hackers have noticed that mainstream culture has shown a | tendency to pathologize and medicalize normal variations in | personality, especially those variations that make life more | complicated for authority figures and conformists. [...] | [T]hus, any social system that depends on authority | relationships will tend to helpfully ostracize and therapize | and drug such 'abnormal' people until they are properly docile | and stupid and 'well-socialized'." | GoblinSlayer wrote: | It's bad for marketing too: | https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/adults- | wi... | | Oh, wait, pharma marketing, waaaaiiit... So, a mortal enemy | of big pharma. | kayodelycaon wrote: | Behaviors become disorders when they severely affect your | ability to function. "In society" is often added. | | The "in society" is a sticking point for many people because a | great many diagnoses are only disorders due to modern society | or cultures. | | Some disorders are largely independent of culture. Severe | executive function problems are on par with more visible | disabilities. Even if having vision from God are acceptable, a | bipolar person will be clearly marked as "not normal" in any | culture. | GoblinSlayer wrote: | Such approach assigns disproportionate importance to | conformance at the cost of integrity. | micromacrofoot wrote: | Disorders aren't intended to dismiss, they diagnose based on a | standard criteria and can provide a toolset for care (if | desired). | | And unfortunately in the US, a diagnosis is often required to | continue seeking therapy (due to insurance requirements). | | Schizoid personality disorder disorder is a set of criteria | that can probably be described as "extreme introversion" -- | it's a disorder in the sense that this isn't the norm in | society. What someone decides to do with that information is up | to them; some choose to do nothing and that's ok. | PuppyTailWags wrote: | No, Schizoaffective disorder is when someone displays the | symptoms of schizophrenia and also the symptoms of a mood | disorder (bipolar, depression). You're likely thinking of | schizoid personality disorder, which is characterized by | solitary behavior and lack of attachments. | micromacrofoot wrote: | Ah yes you're right, my mistake. I've edited my post. Thank | you. | suoduandao2 wrote: | communication becomes impossible in extreme cases - there are | too many prior assumptions in a typical conversation between | humans for it to occur without the ability to orient in a | shared reference frame. | abhaynayar wrote: | For some reason I felt that the author was a girl by the writing. | And then I checked her other post and it turned out I was right. | I wonder what tipped me off. | | The other post on the blog is also pretty cool. Hard relate. | https://eden.bearblog.dev/on-writing/ | dzink wrote: | Could be the lack of ego. Capitalization is often removed by | people who don't want to project a self and instead talk from a | point of humility. Inverse of all-caps which is seen as | "shouting" and forcing your view on another. | jabroni_salad wrote: | The writing's cadence feels similar to Serial's narration, and | that style has been getting a lot of use in the podcasting | world lately. | GoblinSlayer wrote: | Maybe due to victim mentality. But if it's a schizoid girl, | that's hot! | Cornelius267 wrote: | What is wrong with you? | GoblinSlayer wrote: | That's a meme question, and not even a legitimate one, but | forced. | kuramitropolis wrote: | That's an obvious one. The more interesting question is, | what is wrong with _you_? | bckr wrote: | Could it be "eden" was a subtle indicator, as a gendered name? | dnfa wrote: | I was diagnosed with spd a few years ago. I shared the diagnosis | with a few friends, one of whom is a therapist, and they honestly | thought it was a misdiagnosis because I don't always have a flat | affect, can show happiness, etc. But honestly I loved being | diagnosed because I could really identify with what I read about | the disorder. | | What is described here is something I also struggle with - the | obligation to explain my worldview to others. Sometimes there is | no way around it, because the more you withdraw to avoid voicing | your opinion, the more guilt you can feel for somehow being | sneaky or dishonest. I also don't know if sharing the 'why' would | really help. What I see as matter-of-fact can make others | extremely sad. Either way, it's interesting to think about. | Thanks for sharing. | GoblinSlayer wrote: | Emotional coldness is when you react calmly to inflammatory | statements that normies can't withstand. | intelVISA wrote: | Self-control is pathological | GoblinSlayer wrote: | More like a legitimate failure to react to illegitimate | stimulus. It underperforms when not honest. | | In any case the definition explicitly talks about | appearances and expressions, not feelings. | boole1854 wrote: | > What is described here is something I also struggle with - | the obligation to explain my worldview to others. [...] What I | see as matter-of-fact can make others extremely sad. | | Hopefully I'm not making the struggle worse by asking this -- | but can you explain what you mean? That is, what is it about | your worldview that causes others to feel extremely sad? | FLT8 wrote: | A personal example: if the conversation ever turns to | children, or why we don't have any, the real answer is that | we (my wife and I) strongly believe that any children we | might have had would have a (much) worse experience growing | up than we did. They would almost certainly not be able to | dream about affording housing, they will be dealing with | fallout from the ubiquity of | PFAS/PFOS/pthalates/microplastics/..., probably getting | dragged into war(s), dealing with a polarised society and | lack of civil discourse, they will have every move they make | from birth tracked by companies that will be telling them | what to buy and when, their ability to hold a political | opinion that is their own will be severely compromised by | social media and advertisers, they will be dealing with the | fallout of climate change/ increased atmospheric pollutants, | the list goes on. It seems that on so many measures the world | is getting objectively worse, and much harder to navigate. So | I censor myself when taking to friends, particularly friends | with kids, because it's not fair on them to cause them to | start worrying like I do. | uoaei wrote: | I have a similar experience. It is the emotional detachment | from otherwise emotionally salient things that catches people | off guard. Sometimes it is interpreted as "dark humor" or | "deep cynicism" when the person offering the insight means it | only in a realist/stoic sense. | [deleted] | mikrl wrote: | How did you start down the diagnosis pathway? | | My friend feels like the symptoms (clinical and social) fit her | to a T, has felt depersonalized for most of her adult life, and | often feels the need to explain and rationalize her experience | to perplexed onlookers. My friend also passes somewhat well in | society but feels like she has 'generalized impostor syndrome' | ie towards people in general, not just in the workplace. | dnfa wrote: | Just went to therapy because I was depressed. I was lucky to | have a really good therapist. | mikrl wrote: | How do you define good therapist? Obviously it's not | straightforward and YMMV, but are there heuristics you use, | red flags, green flags etc? | | My friend has avoided mental healthcare for her entire life | (pathologically stoic) and thinks that she shouldn't but | feels out of her depth. | daggersandscars wrote: | In my experience, finding a good therapist depends on | establishing a good rapport in a short period of time. To | help the odds, I find looking at therapists' profiles[0] | for what one finds important helps. | | LGBTQ+? Religious? Strongly religious? Polyamorous? An | athlete? Willing/unwilling to take medications? Drug use? | Etc. | | Anything you do not want to be a part of your therapy is | something to check profiles for. | | If you are a part of a group, talk to local members of | that group on-line or in person. They likely will have | inside information on what therapists are considered | friendly. | | I'd also read up on the different types/styles of | therapists/therapy. You may find you're fine with any of | them. You may find some of them horrifying. This info is | likely to be on their profile. | | Edited to add: | | Go in with an idea of what you want out of therapy. If | you're not sure, you can talk to the therapist about | what's possible. Do you want coping strategies / a change | in behavior / someone to talk to / someone to help | determine why you're depressed / etc? | | If it isn't working with a therapist, you can pick a | different one. It may be worth talking to the current one | about what's not working for you, but you always have the | right to see someone else. | | [0] Searching the web for the therapist's name and | location is a good place to start. If you have insurance, | insurance profiles may also provide information. | dnfa wrote: | Honestly just chose one at random and ended up building | trust with them because they were professional and | academic. I kept going back because it was interesting to | me to talk about my experience and have them weigh in | with what the DSM says, what academics are saying, etc. | pc86 wrote: | Feel free to define SWIM. | mikrl wrote: | SWIM is often used in online discussions on sensitive | topics to avoid self-identifying as a member of a | stigmatized or criminalized group: Someone Who Isn't Me. | | However, I have a friend called SWIM, who is the referent | in my posts. I'll update the posts to refer to the friend | explicitly. | DerekBickerton wrote: | Writing or 'stabbing the page with ink' is great and thaws out | the ice in your soul, which we all have from time to time. It's | ironic and meta that this is a blogpost expressing various | feelings, on a matter related to unexpressed emotions. This is | why I blog. I feel vulnerable doing so, but my thoughts are not | so bottled up. Then I can say: 'I've expressed that already', | albeit through a poor channel of a blog, but it's still out | there. If it helped at least one person, I've done my job. | helf wrote: | Augh! Why the lack of capitalization but intact punctuation? | [deleted] | closedloop129 wrote: | >what is creating this boundary? is it merely the withdrawing of | the self | | My armchair answer is that this is creating the boundary. There | is no 'merely'. People want to interact with a self. | | >within your sense of self, as it's building, you are being told | to take apart, to dismantle, as it is being inappropriately build | to their standards. | | That's how society works. People have adjusted their self to fit | in, they expect the same from everybody else. | gnarbarian wrote: | harsh but true. society, family, culture, work, a baseball game | etc. Each of these social structures comes with a whole host of | expectations and rules that make that structure work. we | routinely sacrifice our internal desires to meet these | expectations. generally because we accept that we are all | better off when we sacrifice a little for the good of the | whole. | | I think the really interesting thing is that these things can | all work when people have vastly different motivations for | participating. for an example with baseball, Joe may like the | thrill of a well oiled team making a double play while frank | lives to score and hit the ball. both Frank and Joe hate | getting up to practice. we don't all need to have the same | motivations to make the team work, the only thing that is | needed is for the participants to understand the team is | necessary to get what they want out of it. | Cornelius267 wrote: | > That's how society works. People have adjusted their self to | fit in, they expect the same from everybody else. | | This makes it seem like a personal failing of the person who is | experiencing this disconnect, like the author. Neuroscience | shows that this is not the case, and that those with schizoid | personality disorders have true physiological and neurological | differences. | | I hope that you didn't intend to make this into some sort of | judgment on the person for failing to "adjust themselves to fit | in," because that is a huge part of the judgment that this | author is feeling and trying to describe. | closedloop129 wrote: | With a withdrawn self, how can there be a personal failing? | My point is that people don't attack her specifically, it's | just the way society is. Criticism works for society because | people with a self choose which criticism they accept and | which they ignore. | | People cannot imagine her withdrawn self and thus cannot | adjust their criticism and she cannot imagine a self or bring | back her self for now and thus doesn't understand most | people. | | >which is: they cannot hear me, and i cannot hear them. and | funnily enough i'm trying to hear them and i'm trying to | listen but no one's trying to listen to me, so why should i | keep trying? | | Question remains: How can a withdrawn self be brought back? | engineeringwoke wrote: | > Neuroscience shows that this is not the case, and that | those with schizoid personality disorders have true | physiological and neurological differences. | | Sure, but you assume that the physiological and neurological | differences exist in themselves when you could also say that | are causal, due to the abuse/neglect. The effects on ones | mind from negative life experiences would have to have a | physical manifestation in the brain in order to create the | patterns of disordered behavior of course. If they are caused | by negative life experiences, then they could also be | reversible. | Cornelius267 wrote: | This is true, as a broad statement at least. I can claim no | expertise in the area, so I can't comment on the potential | to reverse any such changes. | | It is also possible that they are not caused by negative | life experiences, and are somehow inherent in the | organization of a particular person's brain. | engineeringwoke wrote: | Of course. But I think it's quite common to claim that | one's problems in life are incontrovertible when they are | not. You stated it as a fact when we really don't know | GoblinSlayer wrote: | Normies have more negative experiences as they are more | susceptible to manipulation to their detriment. So why not | reverse them? | gatonegro wrote: | This was interesting. The writing is hard to follow, but I | understand perfectly well what it's trying to say. Sounds like | the type of ramble I'd go on inside my own mind when I was | younger. | | I'm still annoyed by the absolute nonsense in which we live in, | and I'm thoroughly baffled to see that most people just go with | it--or worse, see it as logical--but I'm trying now to be at | peace with said nonsense. I figure it's the best I can do, since | we're unable to find a compromise. | [deleted] | PuppyTailWags wrote: | I think part of the difficulty is that there is an assumed notion | of an objective reality when it comes to motivations, | relationships, and anything else relating to internal | experiences. Neurotypical people will find significant overlap | with other neurotypical people's internal experiences and | therefore assume that's objective fact, and are only exposed to | radically different internal experiences in the context of | "Crazy", "Psychopath", etc. In fact, as a fellow non-neurotypical | person, I see different neurotypical people differ in internal | experiences from other neurotypical people all the time (see: | introverts vs extroverts, love languages, other pop psychology) | but they're just not categorized the same for seemingly arbitrary | cultural norm reasons, aka popularity. | helf wrote: | Tbh, the more I have to deal with NTs the more convinced I am | that the majority of them do not have much of an inner world or | defined personality. | | There seems to be a complete inability for real introspection | or even "third thoughts" as Pratchett liked to call them; | thoughts about thoughts. | PuppyTailWags wrote: | I would give more of the benefit to NTs; they simply don't | have to develop the skill of explaining their own inner | workings to the level of neurodivergent people at a complex | level. Often times they can speak in a generality and assume | the vast majority of their nuance will be captured by their | audience, which is a strategy often validated by other | neurotypical people. | | There are plenty of neurotypical people talking about their | thinking patterns in the form of pop psychology, horoscopes, | MBTI, meditation, YouTube/TikTok cultural commentators, etc. | It's just not viewed that way because it's viewed as | "normal". But earnestly I don't see a difference between a | neurotypical person saying their love language is acts of | service and an ADHD person telling me that when they talk at | length about their special interest with me it's a sign of | psychological safety. | foobiekr wrote: | A more likely explanation is that they may choose not to show | those thoughts to you. | brnaftr361 wrote: | Should we even be using the term "neurotypical"? | | Like, I don't know a single person that actually suits some | magical mean. The term can only possibly represent some | abstract, non-existent, unidimensional person. And you can't | extract hypothetical expectation sets from the public reliably | because they're in constant flux. | | Maybe social and private dysfunctions, with some degree of | overlap, but there's a pretty wide band, which appears to be | ever-growing in which a huge variety of internal morphologies | can operate. | | I do think though, that we all too closely observe psychology - | itself an instrument with two cutting edges. On one half, you | offer support and vindication to some extent, and on the other | stigma and hopelessness. If we excised our newfound habit of | wanton prognostication - what we're left with is "they're a | peculiar sort" and I wonder if that's not - at least in less | extreme cases - preferable as it forces us to assess from the | ground up the individual rather than some categorical | definition which to me reads as something much more just. An | end unto themselves. | larve wrote: | I think of "neurotypical" as an idealized version of what | society expects a person's thinking to be. In a similar way | to society defining gender roles. Not only does it not apply | to any single person (but rather, people will conform more or | less to that neurotypical construct), but it will vary based | on country, social class, etc... Being neurodivergent means | that you significantly diverge from said ideal, leading to | all kinds of problems. | PuppyTailWags wrote: | I think neurotypical accurately describes people who don't | have neurodevelopmental disorders like ADHD, Schizophrenia, | or Autism. There are distinct brain architectures involved | here; autistics generally have statistically significant | reduced brain activity in response to the human face compared | to neurotypical people. This is a bit like arguing that | because some people learn to read slower than others, or | learn to read by sounding out the words vs memorizing | consonants, that dyslexia shouldn't be differentiated from | non-dyslexic people. | | Of course you can be varied and neurotypical. There are | neurotypical people who focus well and some who struggle with | that a bit more. There are some people who struggle to read | facial expressions and others that can accurately guess | nuances. But that doesn't mean that they're not neurotypical, | and that their internal experiences aren't more widely | represented and reflected in the cultural norm. | w0de0 wrote: | Strikingly absent from the piece, and in my experience from | similar memoirs generally, is an explicit attempt at constructing | general or specific theories of mind. Much may be relieved by | turning one's conceptual skill to the task of modeling another's | experience. This is best done with empathy's aid, which is most | difficult to find when fixated on one's own emotions. ("Be kind, | for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.") | kayodelycaon wrote: | I'm bipolar I've spent several lifetimes(1) studying humanity. | | For many neurotyoical people I've interacted with, non- | neurotyoical people are an outside context problem. | | As an asexual person, sexuality is an outside context problem | that goes in both directions. | | Human brains are pattern matching machines. When we interact with | other people, we have a mental model for how they think (or | should think). That model is built from our internal experience. | | Without shared internal experience or enough data to imagine it, | there will not be true understanding of another's internal | experience. | | As a result, while I am fortunate to often be accepted for who I | am, many people do not understand. Fortunately, I've found | complete understanding is not required if the other people simply | takes what you say at face value. | | The problem comes in when other people decide they don't trust | you and apply their belief of how you should think instead. | | Edit 1. For some fun context. :) | | When I say several lifetimes, I do mean this quite literally. | Mania lets one live at a greatly accelerated rate. Mood swings | frequently bring extremes of emotion that are experienced only | rarely by the average person. It often gives me a deep | understanding of how people work. It's also a curse I'd be very | happy trade for ignorance. | mikrl wrote: | >Mania lets one live at a greatly accelerated rate...It often | gives me a deep understanding of how people work | | My friend experienced this for the first time recently and can | relate, although she does not think it helped her understand | people better. | | However, the burst of confidence, creative (and sexual) energy | did lead her to more prosocial behaviours but in retrospect she | was as awkward as ever, without the usual stabilizers of self- | consciousness and social anxiety. My friend did some silly | things, has regrets and may have overwhelmed people, but she | does not think it was necessarily pathological. | | My friend got really scared of herself when she realized what | she was doing. She felt like she was experiencing the energy of | a stimulant high for a few weeks, despite being sober. My | friend is not sure if it was worth it, nor did she prefer it to | being depressed, because of that fear of herself. | nvrspyx wrote: | Mania is often accompanied by quite a few negative aspects: | | - Irrational, grandiose ideas (i.e., delusions) | | - Increased susceptibility to believe ideas (e.g., more | likely to fall for a spam marketing scheme) | | - Hallucinations | | - Impulsive and/or risky behaviors | | - Easily distracted | | - Difficulty sustaining attention | | I imagine the parent commenter more likely experiences | hypomania associated with bipolar II disorder rather than the | mania associated with bipolar I disorder. The former is much | less likely to exhibit the listed negative symptoms and | general disinhibition tends to be lesser as well. | kayodelycaon wrote: | I'm pretty firmly diagnosed Type 1. My psychiatrist said | I'm "high functioning". | | I've had many manic episodes lasting 9 months, with a least | two psychotic breaks. The latest lasting 4 months. Still | managed to work in an office as a developer throughout it. | | You can read about that one on my blog: | https://kayode.co/blog/4106/living-with-psychosis/ | kayodelycaon wrote: | I should have clarified. | | The mood swings in general give me insight into internal | state. Mania does not. | | Mania gave me the energy to do a lot of things I would never | have done or experienced without. The variety of lived | experience means I know what many people's jobs are and the | general strategies used to do them. | | The combination makes understanding people easier. | | But mania isn't worth it. It is a terrible monster I never | want to see again. One episode broken me so completely I lost | all self-identity. | Dracophoenix wrote: | > Human brains are pattern matching machines. When we interact | with other people, we have a mental model for how they think | (or should think). That model is built from our internal | experience. Without shared internal experience or enough data | to imagine it, there will not be true understanding of | another's internal experience. As a result, while I am | fortunate to often be accepted for who I am, many people do not | understand. Fortunately, I've found complete understanding is | not required if the other people simply takes what you say at | face value. | | Doesn't taking people at face value usually result in these | misunderstandings in the first place? Many people use language | as a signifier of their emotional states rather than as a tool | to express objective assessments of reality. | kayodelycaon wrote: | I should have been more specific. It's about making | assumptions. | | If you don't have the context to understand the other | person's motivations, treating them as if they think like you | causes problems. | | The biggest example of this is telling someone with ADHD they | are lazy and just need to try harder. | narag wrote: | _The problem comes in when other people decide they don't trust | you and apply their belief of how you should think instead._ | | That is certainly a shared experience. | machina_ex_deus wrote: | Make a mental model of which people can understand which things. | Understand what topics they are even interested in. Understand | how disinterested person reacts and know when to stop, and | understand how an interested person react and know when you can | share. Ask people if they are interested in what you're saying. | Check their attention. Check their understanding. Understand | which people simply don't have the mental capacity to understand | difficult topics and just avoid discussing it with them. | Understand which people are judging topics emotionally and avoid | trying to reason with them logically because it's pointless. | Don't try to drop everything all at once, understanding is | gradual. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. | | You might have great mental models of the "world" but lack in | mental models of other people. Some rational people have really | undeveloped emotional reasoning, because they don't use it for | themselves, but still use their own emotional reasoning for | understanding other people. You can rationally understand other | people even if they are irrational themselves. | 1MachineElf wrote: | This is the kind of stuff I incessantly think about after vaping | too much Delta 9 triggers paranoia. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-10-03 23:01 UTC)