I started down this road because I was thinking about making an observation that a lot of trans people are sociopaths. But that made me wonder if there is any difference between calling someone a sociopath and just saying that you don’t like some of the things they do to other people. What makes the term “sociopath” a diagnosis, and not an epithet?
What makes the term “sociopath” a diagnosis, and not an epithet?
Having never even taken intro to psych, when I say “sociopath,” it’s just name-calling. I assume that real psychiatrists have a more professional way to use the term. Maybe they even think in terms of treatment.
I wondered if anyone has ever agreed to a diagnosis of being a sociopath. Try to picture a sociopath nodding his head and saying, “Yup, that’s me.”
So that led me to wonder about what sort of diagnosis I would accept for myself. I’ve briefly consulted therapists a couple of times. They were willing to label me as bipolar, but without much conviction, and I never took to it as a diagnosis. I say that my mood has a Minsky cycle, but I don’t see it as dominating my life.
On my propensity to come up with business ideas that don’t catch others’ fancy, I like to quote Wallace Stegner in Angle of Repose.
That does not mean he was foolish or mistaken. He was premature. His clock was set on pioneer time. He met trains that had not yet arrived, he waited on platforms that hadn’t yet been built, beside tracks that might never be laid.
Years ago, a therapist told me that I have a very active “inner life.” That might be another way to account for the business ideas that I come up with.
I used to assume that everyone daydreamed as much as I do, but the therapist’s observation made me realize that I spend more time than most people in an alternate reality. I asked ChatGPT-4 whether Walter Mitty would be diagnosed with a mental disorder, and it demurred. Then I asked it if there is such a thing as excessive daydreaming. It replied,
Yes, excessive daydreaming can be a sign of a mental health condition called Maladaptive Daydreaming (MD). It is a relatively new concept in the field of psychology and refers to a condition in which an individual spends an excessive amount of time daydreaming to the point that it interferes with their daily functioning.
People with MD may find it difficult to focus on their work or studies, maintain relationships, and complete daily tasks due to their extensive daydreaming. They may also experience distress or impairment in other areas of life due to their inability to control their daydreaming.
Some common characteristics of MD include vivid and elaborate daydreams that can last for hours, recurring themes or storylines in their daydreams, and a difficulty in distinguishing between reality and fantasy.
While it is not yet recognized as an official diagnosis in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), researchers are beginning to study MD and its potential relationship to other mental health conditions such as anxiety, depression, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). If you or someone you know is struggling with excessive daydreaming that is causing distress or interfering with daily functioning, it may be helpful to seek the guidance of a mental health professional.
I guess the question is what it takes for daydreaming to be “maladaptive.” A lot the time I spend dreaming up business ideas, and occasionally trying to execute them, has been wasted. But it worked out once.
I’ve written several thousand pages of fiction over the years, but I have never published any. I figure that if I try to publish it myself, it won’t be commercial. No one will read it, so what’s the point? I had that problem with my self-published nonfiction book, Learning Economics.
On the other hand, if I find an agent and a publisher, they’ll try to make it commercial, so they’ll change it. But I won’t like it any more after they’ve changed it, so what’s the point? I had the latter problem with Under the Radar and Unchecked and Unbalanced.
I figure that Wallace Stegner must have done a lot of daydreaming on the way to writing his fiction. Did that adversely affect him in the rest of his life? I asked ChatGPT-4 if Stegner had a satisfying personal life.
Stegner was married to his wife, Mary, for over 50 years until her death in a car accident in 1993. They had two children together, a son named Page and a daughter named Stegner.
From what is publicly known about Wallace Stegner's personal life, he appeared to have a relatively satisfying and fulfilling family life. He was known to be a devoted husband and father, and his family was an important part of his life. Stegner wrote about his family and personal experiences in his novels and essays, often drawing inspiration from his own life and relationships.
So there you go. I guess I’ll keep daydreaming.
According to Wikipedia: Stenger had one child -- Page. Stenger died in a car accident in 1993, but his wife survived him until 2010.
From a societal perspective, the question of mental disease concerns the extent to which a person's imagination / alternative reality imposes a burden on others or otherwise causes harm.
Observe that Progressivism empowers broken individuals to impose themselves on society in a much greater number of ways. The forced accommodation for trans identity is just one. Coddling criminals and malcontents, as is the norm in certain progressive meccas, is no less destructive to healthy society.
The social impact of coddling criminals reveals that the coddlers are just as broken and even more dangerous to society than the people being coddled. What has become apparent is the mentally and emotionally deficient inmates are running the asylum.
What makes Kling and I and other dreamers innocuous is we are conscious of social boundaries and personal limits. We may personally be less productive than we could be. We may offer less constructive benefit to society than is our potential. But we inherently know our limits and what is appropriate to demand others do to appease our dreams.
The sociopaths that dominate progressive politics have no guardrails. They imagine a world free of consequences and they impose that impossibility on others. And then to keep the dream alive they reject all evidence of the harm and social destruction their program causes. These are bad people and it is unclear what if anything will stop them.