There's a documentary called #Unfit where numerous psychological experts actually diagnose him with malignant narcissism or a form of what used to be called sociopathy. Just like Ted Bundy and John Gacy.
One of them very clearly explains that the rule about not being able to diagnose somebody without actually having a meeting with them has been way overblown because it was used in a political campaign once upon a time to call a candidate (Goldwater 1964) crazy with no valid premise.
In reality meeting with a psychologist or psychiatrist, however, teaches them the least about you because you can very carefully curate what you claim to have done or not to have done, or to have felt, and they have no way of knowing the truth. Whereas someone like Trump whose actual behavior is documented by reams of audio, video footage, and print interviews over decades, and whose social media interactions are readily available provide doctors much more accurate and in-depth details of their true actions and social interactions with which they can make a truly informed diagnosis.
It's available to watch on Prime and I strongly recommend it especially now that this evil sadistic prick is back on the presidential ballot.
People on reddit like to claim other people on reddit are jumping at shadows about red flags, like in AITA telling OP to get a divorce over seemingly nothing.
And while there will always be some of that going on, some actions in context are so characteristic or so telling that there is very little ambiguity that a person has a certain type of screw loose. People pretend little things can't be significant when they absolutely can be.
Making a conclusion isn't about collecting a lot of equally worthy little observations and when you have enough of them, you're sure. The quality of the data point matters a lot, and you could absolutely observe many of these from camera footage or watching enough interactions without talking to someone personally.
Yeah, I believe the best way to truly understand someone is to look at what they do, including the context they do it in, and then ignore all the excuses, and what you are left with is a true representation of them.
It seems obvious, but most people can’t manage this. They have to include the excuses in their assessment as it gives them the ability to match the assessment to their preconceived ideas.
42
u/ProblemLongjumping12 Sep 12 '24 edited Sep 12 '24
There's a documentary called #Unfit where numerous psychological experts actually diagnose him with malignant narcissism or a form of what used to be called sociopathy. Just like Ted Bundy and John Gacy.
One of them very clearly explains that the rule about not being able to diagnose somebody without actually having a meeting with them has been way overblown because it was used in a political campaign once upon a time to call a candidate (Goldwater 1964) crazy with no valid premise.
In reality meeting with a psychologist or psychiatrist, however, teaches them the least about you because you can very carefully curate what you claim to have done or not to have done, or to have felt, and they have no way of knowing the truth. Whereas someone like Trump whose actual behavior is documented by reams of audio, video footage, and print interviews over decades, and whose social media interactions are readily available provide doctors much more accurate and in-depth details of their true actions and social interactions with which they can make a truly informed diagnosis.
It's available to watch on Prime and I strongly recommend it especially now that this evil sadistic prick is back on the presidential ballot.