I did some more tests this morning. The set of tests linked from the narcissism subreddit. My results are 16-18 for narcissism aka moderate narcissism, 11 for codependency and 3 for OCD aka OCD unlikely. My classification of covert borderline looks correct but it will also put me in normie range. The post I did promise is still coming but I need to find a way to break my fear.
I need to find or make a psychological model so I can switch between my psychological states at will. In particular I want to have covert borderline as my base state and primary psychopathy as my flow state. MBTI may be a good enough model but functions aren’t states, I need know the function outputs for INTJ so I can forcefully trigger the states I want when I want them. DSM 5 is not good enough because it is an inflexible, design by committee, work from the cathedral, similar to common lisp. It is too hard to use to be useful in practice. I am in a flow state right now because we were trying to be a forecast snow storm at work, which isn’t coming now.
I am making some progress, sarini11 gave me some good tips and introduced me to
C.S. Joseph. It looks like I may be able to use MBTI alone to do what I want, but I would probably make the map because it needs to be done anyway.
Borderline personality disorder sucks. I don’t know why anyone would want it. It sucks when moods control you.
Because I was good yesterday, Eris revealed to me how she manages her states. Instead of avoiding embarrassment and humiliation, she takes it to the chin and pushes through courageously with eyes fixed on the goal. Most people go along with whatever is suggested, and I am considered naughty for coming to my own conclusion anyways. Having me pass this information along to make me feel important is how she is going to keep me complacent.
Certain states of arousal can only be entered via embarrassment and humiliation so in a way it is its own reward. In this way, you can conceptualize psychopaths as arousal addicts.
I did try that.
It looks like I am an existentialist.
I realized a problem with the rope model a couple days ago but to explain the problem I need to define the word context. Scope is a synonym for context.
context : the set of objects being invoked or embodied by a concept
Here is the problem. If we just look at Bill Gaede’s universal thread in a context of one universe, then it is an object that doesn’t exist because it can’t have a location due to the fact that there is no other objects it can have a distance from.
I got Bill Gaede to respond to my criticism of his model, and he had to extend his model to my model, therefore, I am now an expert of his model.
He had to use my definition of context and my definition of multiverse to get around the fact that the thread didn’t have a location in the context of the universe it made up.
He still can’t debunk Stephan Wolfram’s New Kind of Science model because the universal Turing machine is the same thing as his thread. They are completely compatible.
I now have a definition for nothing.
nothing : object that doesn’t exist that you present physics on
If I demonstrated physics via a video on your screen, your screen will be nothing in the context of the demonstration, but you would still need it to see the shapes of the objects. The implications are that objects can exist or not exist depending on the context they are being demonstrated in and that any nothing you want to present on must have a shape.
If you remove Euclid’s 1st postulate, multiverses work.
The condition where A straight line segment can not be drawn joining any two points would be where you are working with 2 universes that are not joined as one in a multiverse configuration.
These humiliation / self mortification rites are annoying.
At least I got my 4th chakra issue diagnosed. One of the things I am going to do about it is indulge my addictions instead of controlling them. A lot of successful people have addictive personality and if I am goal oriented, I won’t buy anything and at least I will be motivated to feed my addictions, and that is better than nothing. In Sam Vaknin’s interview with Jessica Corvo Vaknin said addiction took up whopping 40% of the brain’s physical structure. By comparison language consumed 3%, Behavior consumed 8%, emotions consumed 1%, and memory consumed 6%.
If woo is a synonym for region than the rules of woo are very important.
Woo Rules
- There are no rules, only discoveries.
- Discoveries only lasts as long as they last.
I cracked open a copy of the DSM-5 to win an argument, and I forget that it said right in the book that it says mental disorders were socially constructed.
Mental disorders are defined in relation to cultural, social, and familial norms and values.
Culture provides interpretive frameworks that shape the experience and expression of the
symptoms, signs, and behaviors that are criteria for diagnosis. Culture is transmitted, revised, and recreated within the family and other social systems and institutions. Diagnostic
assessment must therefore consider whether an individual’s experiences, symptoms, and
behaviors differ from sociocultural norms and lead to difficulties in adaptation in the cultures of origin and in specific social or familial contexts. Key aspects of culture relevant to diagnostic classification and assessment have been considered in the development of DSM-5.
Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5 (Vol. Section I, page 14). (2013). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association.
Why aren’t Satanic groups burning old copies of the DSM rather than bibles? Wouldn’t it make more sense to burn the DSM in a social context? (as in the LHP being the opposition of the current culture)
1 Like
That is a really good point. We may need to form a group and start burning copies of the DSM. I think David Wood created other innovative ways to make effigies of documents other than burning them.
I don’t know what the companion guide is for the DSM, if it exists. I know Judism has the Talmud and Islam has the Hadith.
1 Like
Not quite the same but scientology is kinda anti DSM or psychiatry in general. Probably not helpful, just thought I would mention it 
1 Like
I am not sure I share a single other belief with Scientology.
I did find a video on status that I think is interesting.
Marketing may be science.
1 Like
I’ll have to take a look! I’m not crazy on Scientologists beliefs either 
just thought hmm already a religion who’s against it thoroughly 
And ofc marketing is science… why do you think people take psychology degrees and end up in marketing jobs!
1 Like
I have no idea. Maybe psychiatry is a soft pseudoscientific cyst on the hard science of marketing.
1 Like