I'm thinking about doing a study on instrumental aggression (aggression for the sake of a tangible goal or reward, rather than being prompeted by frustration or emotional outburst). First off I'd like to describe the gist of the experiment (still a gleem in my eye), and then ask for any interesting research on instrumental aggression that anyone has encountered, in the event that I've missed something.

My primary motive is not instrumental aggression itself, but rather its relation to psychopathy (my main interest of psychopathology). Many psychological disorders are associated with an increase in reactive aggression (frustration or emotionally based, no tangible reward). This can be seen in CD/ODD/Childhood and adult bipolar disorder/Intermittent explosive disorder and the list goes on. It has been shown that reactive aggression is linked to frontal lobe dysfunctions, particularly in the ventral (or orbital) regions. While it is true that (criminal) psychopaths display more reactive aggression than non-dysfunctioned controls, they are unique in that they also show a heavy bias towards instrumental aggression (criminals have a 50-50 chance of having committed reactive or instrumental aggression, psychopaths have a 3-97% slide in favor of instrumentality).

Where reactive aggression is linked to poor behavioral inhibition (seen in psychopaths and other disorders), instrumental aggression, I would posit, is a function of poor socialization. One of the unique factors seen in psychopathy is a limited emotional affect (Factor 1 PCL-R). This could explain why instrumental aggression is more prevalent in psychopaths.

The study I'm considering doing would use a community sample (university students), and as such would use a diagnostic device other than the PCL-R (gold standard in forensic psychopathy diagnosis, but inappropriate for community samples), almost certainly the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) would be used. It's fairly easy to complete, score and interpret. In line with some studies, I would be using what's called an 'extreme group analysis', where in the top 10% are taken as 'psychopaths' and the bottom 10% as 'non-psychopaths'.

Participants will complete a 'game' on a computer, which is described as follows...

1) There are believed to be 3 players, when it is actually only them playing against the computer.
2) Each player can choose to either gain 1 point per trial, or to steal points from other 'players' in set amounts (1, 10, 25, 50), there are 100 trials.
3) Players can only 'mug' one other player per trial.
4) The amount they mug for is directly linked to the probability that they will be revealed as the theif to their victim (1%, 10%, 25% or 50% respectively). Regardless of whether or not they are revealed, the keep what they steal.
5) Participants are told that only those scoring over 100 points at the end will receive the credit point normally given for participating in experiments (they actually get it either way, this is simply a prompt for instrumental aggression)
6) Their current score is always on screen.
7) The participants are never, themselves, robbed.

The hypothesis is that participants scoring high on the Fearless-Dominance and Impulsive-Antisociality factors (analagous to Factors one and two on the PCL-R) of the PPI will show more intense mugging, earlier onset mugging, and more frequent mugging.


Can anyone suggest any refinements, I just had this thought last night and jotted it down on a page before bedtime.

Fuck knows how to do the experiment, but you ought to let it be known that if you don't get the funding you need some arses are going be kicked.

I once had a piano lid slam down on my hands. It fucking hurt. Is there a format you're using to document these encounters?

Perhaps I should have added, "scientists, post too"?

The main hang ups I'm having are as follows...

1) Letting the participants choose any level of mugging that they want might be more accurate as a gauge for instrumental aggression.
2) The probability of being caught was to act as a mediator, though I don't believe it to be truly needed.
3) Telling the participants that they must get above 100 points as a prompt for instrumental aggression may flood the results. I mean, who wouldn't take 'points' for the sake of an increase in their grades? Also, they only have to rob once, for one point, in order to reach their goals.

There's really nothing to be funded, the total cost of the experiment would probably be under $50.

I said psychopathy, not psychosis. Read it again.
Edit: I'll spell it out using less of a review of previous material...

I'm studying psychopathy, which is associated with instrumental aggression (unlike any other psychopathological condition that I am aware of). The 'game', as described above, is designed to provoke instrumental aggression (hurting another as a means to an end). The hypothesis thus far is that participants scoring high on the PPI (the typical measure of psychopathy in community samples) will show different (increased) patterns of instrumental aggression than the control participants.

I used those other disorders as examples of reactive aggression caused by frontal lobe dysfunctions. Learn to read and maybe you won't have to make such stupid posts all the time.

What's your negative control?

Participants scoring in the low 10% of the PPI.

What the hell are you talking about??? Victus never said anything about studying psychosis, and bipolar is not classified as a psychotic disorder, even though some manic episodes may incorporate near delusional thinking.

Victus didn’t cite a case of adult bipolar disorder, and never said anything about psychosis.

??????

A) you are fixated on psychosis which wasn’t even remotely the point of anything Victus wrote and B) where are you getting your info from, DSM I? The term neurosis isn’t even used anymore.

You may wish to be evaluated for psychotic ideation, as you are definitely not making any sense whatsoever. Albert Einstein was not a psychologist, either.

Word salad?

Calling a person psychotic is not against the law, and unless said person could prove that the so-called libel or slander caused actual financial or physical harm, then said person’s lawsuit would be thrown out of court. So I’m guessing you’re not psychotic then, but bipolar?

there, I had to get that out of my system, now I can think clearly again.

Why would you link psychopathy to poor socialization, when there is a fair bit of evidence for altered neurophysiology? I'm not really familiar with the literature on psychopathy outside of what I've read on neurophysiology (sorry, I don't have the refs), but I recall seeing papers on hypoactivity of cortical (and maybe limbic?) structures, and something about smaller orbitofrontal regions. Besides that, I recall there is a component of the diagnostic criteria in DSM-IV that includes manipulative qualities of the psychopath, and as I understand it, psychopaths can be incredibly charming and highly socially skilled when it suits them to be. Anyway, I'm not sure that it's necessary to bring in socialization for the purposes of your study, as socialization is not a variable in your proposed design, nor does it sound like you'll be making any generalizations about socialization from your results.

Maybe a potential stumbling block here is your sampling population... I don't know the instrument you plan to use, but I suspect it would have to be pretty sensitive to detect a significant difference in psychopathy among non-incarcerated (and hopefully not extremely psychopathic) college students. Is that something that it can do reliably? If so, then you are in good shape. If not, then you might have a problem creating a big enough difference in the means for statistical power.

I wonder how much trouble you'd have getting this through your IRB? I mean, it's sort of like Milgram's study that revealed to people how vicious and Nazi-like they could be. There would definitely have to be some deception, and you probably couldn't do a full reveal on the debriefing, and I'm not sure you could get an informed consent on that little detail of them not getting credit. Do you have a pretty flexible review board?

One other thing; and I may not fully understand the context of the study, so please set me straight if I'm not interpreting well, but I'm wondering what would be the point of doing a study to show a correlation between a psychopathic personality type and a score on a game that tests tendency toward instrumental aggression (as a psychopathic personality trait)? If the link between psychopathy and instrumental aggression is already as well established as you indicated, then are you testing the PPI for use as a diagnostic or predictive tool? Or is the correlation between instrumental aggression and psychopathy not as definite as I'm thinking?

You might want to try getting permission to access a sampling frame at a prison instead of a college. You will more than likely get a nice sample of psychopaths there. Of course, that might increase the costs of your study, you'd have to pay your participants in cigarettes instead of grade points. (joking... sort of...)

Your analysis is quite accurate, however dysfunction in the central amygdala in psychopaths has been hypothosized to manifest as failed socialization (Blair, 2005). It is one of the proposed 'causes' (as much as such a thing is possible in a probabistic science) for instrumental aggression.

It has been tested on community samples (including undergraduate students), (Benning 2003, 2005). Your concerns are valid though, as university students are, logically, less likely to have some of the impulsive-antisociality traits associated with psychopathy, in comparison to the general population. Luckily, the primary purpose of the PPI is to detect non-forensic (non-jailed) psychopathy traits. It is seperated into two factors, Fearless dominance (the 'core' traits of psychopathy) and impulsive antisociality (the violent and socially deviant traits commonly associated with, but not needed for, psychopathy). As such the primary predictor being used would be FD traits, with IA traits being of secondary interest. There is no preclusion to persons with high FD reaching the university level (infact their ruthlessness would probably help them advance in some instances).

The risk would be minimal, as they're not even believing to be hurting anyone else, only stealing abstract 'points' from them. As such, I doubt the ethics board would have a big problem with it. Our ethics guidelines require us to disclose everything about the experiment once its over, and provide contact information to the board as well. Still, I doubt this would make many waves, as taking points from people is probably less traumatic that administering (fake) shocks to lethally punish a person.

I've only seen one study on it (though it is a widely referenced paper and generally accepted as a 'truth' in the field). This was only shown in forensic populations though, and never in community samples (to my knowledge). Studies on community samples are new, as previous tools have only been forensic based. The PCL-R takes way too long to apply in community samples, whereas self-report measures (while admittedly less trustworthy) take less time to complete, score and interpret.

Somewhat defeats the purpose, but yeah. The 'unsuccessful' psychopaths in prison populations would be alot easier and frequent than in the community sample. There is, however, a way around this that has been used in studies with the PPI before. It's called 'extreme group analysis'. We split the top and bottom 10% of PPI scores and make our groups from there. With a large enough sample, it works (apparently, I'm actually quite weak at math).

PS: Thanks for routing anon's post. I couldn't be bothered for sheer idiocy and illiteracy. Excellent critique and questioning.

Nothing will get you banned faster than playing lawyer.

Gentle, Scatty. ;)

Naw! C'mon! Sic her!

Im just wondering how good a model for instrumental aggression is this computer game? Im sure you could get a few false positives, since it is a lot easier to virtually mug somebody. Are you allowed ask for histories of aggressive behaviour/ criminal conviction etc. and then correlate that with your top 10% ers?

There are a few problems with this...

1) Most university students aren't going to have a criminal record, aside from underage drinking and the like, certainly almost none would have violent offenses on their records (compared to the forensic samples where almost all of them have violent records).

2) Even if the sample did contain a bizare amount of previous offenders, it would almost be the same as measuring the forensic samples, where instrumental aggression in psychopaths is established.

3) It's quite likely that at least some bottom 10% PPI scoring participants will commit instrumental aggression (if we're to agree that this tests that behavior). However on the whole, they should show much less of it than those in the top 10% of the PPI factors being measured.

So far I'm considering making 'level of necesity' a variable, where in one group is told that they must finish 1st in order to receive the reward and the other is not.

Nah, I'm just not in the mood today, K! Besides, it's not nice to beat up on midgets.

Thanks Victus.

Good luck on your study! It will be interesting (if not also very disturbing) to see if your population yields enough of a difference in the psychopathy scores to affect the dependent variable. You should definitely let us know when it's published!

So the results will be skewed towards the aggressive side in all cases compared to real life since in reality most of these people do not regularly commit instrumental aggression. Can you think of any other factors besides (aggression) than could skew the results further for certain individuals? Like regular computer gaming or gambling?

The question is--did you do it on purpose--and did you repeat it?

Those kinds of variables would be impossible to control for, unless we want to eliminate like 60% of our participants. That's where random dampling comes in, all the random BS smooths out.

It was my brother who did it, and he did not repeat it as I proceeded to beat the holy shit out of him.

Come to think of it, he'd be a good candidate for this study.......

Surely you can ask people if they have experience in "virtual aggression" like in Grand theft auto or something. A yes answer may indicate some level of desensitisation to virtual aggression (as in your experiment) without ever influencing the individuals real aggression outside the lab. Either way, any corelation would be interesting and no corelation would mean that kind of thing can be ruled out.

Do you have access to a truly random sample? I mean not confined to university students. Studies have shown how low parental education level, conduct problems, and hyperactivity in middle childhood predict criminal offenses in later life. University students are less likely than your average banana to have had these disadvantages so do not reflect the general public. Or you could compare university educated students to non university- educated people of the same age?

I do not pity psychologists when it comes to controlling for variables. Best of luck

It would be nearly impossible to gage the type of aggression they show in the games (instrumental or reactive), over their entire lifespan. Furthermore, levels of severityof aggression in previous gaming experiences would be hard to code, and most often not be against another human player (as in this study where they will be under the impression that they are playing against humans in other rooms). The best we could hope to do is to ask "do you play videogames that are violent?", which would give us almost no information. Good idea though.

No sample can be truly random, but we aren't allowed to rome the streets with nets, nabbing up participants (damn you ethics board!). So the best we can do without expending rediculous resources and time is to open it up to anyone, and advertise around the campus.

Indeed, lab rats are where its at. The are bred specific, live in boxes, have specific day/night times, etc. Most of our participants have ~20 years of undocumented lifetime that would take rediculous resources to account for.

Hi Victus,

Thanks for your replies. I have trouble getting my head around psychological experiments....I was put off psychology as an undergrad. The neuroscience class had to do a compulsory course in "cultural psychology". I was told in this class that us scientists couldnt hold our "theories" any higher than his cultural relativism bullshit. We complained so much the module was stricken from the degree. Since then I display caution when it comes to interpreting the results of psychological experiments.

You will have to sort that ethics board out. All you need for that random sample is a giant quadrat and a busy street....either that or a stereological method called the "optical fractionator"...but they probably dont let you cut them up either...bastards

Yeah, you always have to take psychological experiments with a grain of salt. It possible to make a totally invalid experiment, but still have results that seem plausible (but aren't in reality). There are so many variables that you have to account for that it's rediculous. You're left casting a net and saying "I hope I don't get a set of participants who are freakishly deviant from the general population".

Standard double blind procedures keep things clean on the experimental side, as well as verified procedures (is what we're measuring really what we say we're measuring?).

AHHH...that means you also see the christ-psychotics-- who ACCEPT delusions as if they were reality just like the schizophrenia, temporal lobe epilepsy and dementiae sufferers-- as mentally ill?

Remember, a PH.D is not needed to SEE, that those unfortunate people infected with religious psychosis which makes their weak genetically defective brains, accept invisible friends as REAL, suffer from a neurological disorder and in need of treatment!. :)

Anon, you illiterate junky. Make relevant posts or get the flying fuck out of my threads.

Hey, knucklehead, has anyone tendered any cash to cal for a diagnosis? Has an insurer done so? Does cal claim to be a medical professional? The answer is, obviously, no. His opinions have some value, just not what you want them to have. I think you should go find an xtian website that is pushing jeebus on unsuspecting people and give them a piece of your feeble intellect on the damage they do. It would be time better spent.

I ALONE? You do not read much do you?.The ACCEPTANCE of a delusion ( from where ALL religious beliefs get their dogma) as if it was REAL is symptom of MENTAL ILLNESS!!. This has NOTHING to do with the legal system of ANY COUNTRY on this planet. Legal system and neurology are separate things. If you accept an invisible friend as REAL and you are not 5 years old you are MENTALLY ILL, suffering from either schizophrenia, TLE or dementia. I must reminds you the vast majority of neurological disorders are IDIOPATHIC ( the cause is unkown). In the moment neurologist find the pathogen that causes religious-psychosis, the Christ-psychotics in the US are going to be treated LIKE ANY other mentally ill person. i,e Hitler, Jones, Koresh, Doe, Andrea Yates, Paul Hill, Eric Rudolph etc etc etc. Andrea Yates is a classical example of what Christ-pschosis can do.

....And the INCOMPETENT retards so called psychiatrists diagnosed her religious psychosis as Post Partum Depression!! What about her BELIEVE in an invisible friend JESUS responsible for her SENDING ( drowning ) her 5, not one, FIVE, of her children to 'see" him and leave this satanic earth?..and this is "post partum depression?..what about Doe and Koresh did they have PPD also?...:lol:...and PHELPS?...do you think he is mentally healthy? Who is this insane man and his insane family's invisible friend? Isn't is JESUS? Remember there are HUNDREDS of examples, and the difference between the Christ -psychotics and the chizophrenia sufferes is the TYPE of invisible friends they have!!:lol:....remember, the angel Moroni, the Holy Spirit, the Eagle Great Spirit of the Navajo, the UFO brain implants, the Jesus that saves with blood are ALL DELUSIONS. Aren't DISEASED brains those able to produced them?

if the show fits....Here, get educated..and this article is from NEUROLOGISTS.

http://www.psychminded.co.uk/news/ne...%20illness.htm

The brain make uswhat we are and when it gets SICK it ACCEPTS religious fantasies as if they were truly real. Deal with it. I suggest you study neurology and read:

"What's Thought" by Eric Braum (2004) "The Quest for Consciousness" a neurobiological approach, by Christoff Koch (2004) "The Astonishing Hypothesis " the scientific search for the soul, by Francis Crick (1994) then read about the JERUSALEM SYNDROME. A form of CHirst-psychosis discovered by Dr Yair Bar-El. It happens in Jerusalem ( The City of Nuts )

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/577180.stm

You have a LOT to learn. Hmm..infected with Christ-psychosis perhaps which produces such distorted thinking?..Do you hear advis from t he invisible friend Jesus?...do you see him? Does the Babble become alive while you are dreaming?
Do you have deep faith in invisible friends and supernatural phenomenae?..do you believe in ghosts?....those could be signs of a chemical imbalance precursor of full blown christ-psychosis ( Jones, Yates, Koresh etc)

http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j2...hizBrainTN.jpg

An schizophrenic brain ( shown) and one infected with Christ-psychosis, light up in very similar areas...:)

Well I guess that my lawyer colleague who told me that doesn't know anything about the law, and you and your 10 minutes of searching the web to copy and paste some completely unrelated bullshit most certainly equates to a law degree and 30 years of practice. Gracious, I don't know why anyone would bother with all that expense when they could just ask you for the correct information!

Yes, I'll be sure to seek advice from an MD on use of terminology and word. Right after I finish giving my lecture on the topic of diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders.


While I'm absolutely devastated that you've tattled on me to the moderators because you don't think I understand psychosis and bipolar disorder (Eva and Ten, are you also getting deluged with emails?) I prefer to get my grasp of the diagnostic criteria from my DSM. Your links are jejune (look it up on the web).

You're an idiot. Your mental disorder has so far prompted me toward pity, but don't push it. Or I will give you some REAL references. Now go take your Depakote and don't bother me anymore. I'm not interested in any of your "information" you gleaned from quickie web searches.

Oh and if you think you can claim damages for me calling you bipolar, then go ahead and sue me. And while you're at it, you can sue me for calling you a dumbass, too. Dumbass.

Since the insult has to cause damage to the individual's reputation, calling anon a dumbass doesn't constitute libel/slander. It actually elevates anon's status from Douchebag, and thus constitutes a minor compliment.

Actually, I was just looking for a reason to back-up something you had to say, Scat. Been a while; keep up the good work, Madame Chief-of-Staff ;)

Guess you're off the hook, Scat.

Anon, I do not know if you are aware that there are several peer-reviewed papers and researched articles from the medical community which deal with religion as a psychosis. I don't have much time to research for you, but here's a start:

"Spiritual Experience or Religious Psychosis", P. Chadwick, Birkbeck College Faculty, University of London (26 Apr 2000)
"Educating Sufferers of Religous Psychosis", B. Bamber, Mental Health Nursing (Nov 2003)
"Frequency and severity of religious delusions in Christian patients with psychosis", Medline (1998)
"Serial Killers: Albert Fish", University of Florida, H. Rawlins (2005)
"Religious experiences in epileptic patients with a focus on ictus-related episodes", Medline(1996)

I'm sure you can find more information on the internet. Like I said, this was a quick search.

Before we go any further, would you please list your credentials?

I personally don't always agree with Cal. However, I am not going to silence him because you disagree with his posts. The day Cal starts to claim that he is a medical doctor is the day that I'll have a serious talk with him about it.

But you don't see that, do you? You could just look at it as his rant, and don't take it so personally.

Maybe TheJudge could fill you in on Cal. He went through much the same phase you're experiencing, albeit he went about it in a more professional manner.

anon, you are a cunt.
good day.

Um, okay. I say here now, forthrightly, that I agree that a person having religious belief is having psychosis. Since the Wikipedia describes psychosis as "a generic psychiatric term for a mental state in which thought and perception are severely impaired," then a person with religious beliefs most certainly fits the term.

Of course, there are varying degrees of religious psychosis, just as there are varying degrees of nonreligious psychosis. There are people who'se only impairment manifests with regards to their religious ideas; that is, they seem perfectly capable of functioning in any other area of life or reality, but they inexplicably suspend their rational faculty on matters of a spiritual nature.

And then there are the seething fundamentalists like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Fred Phelps, or Carico, who are schizophrenically psychotic in their religious belief; that is, they are unable to distinguish their religious fantasies from the rest of reality, and are therefore incapable of properly functioning with the rest of society.

Depends on your profession. Cunt might be a technical term for a gynecologist, but I'm not one, so I don't know.

I don't know; we'd have to take a poll to find out. But you've currently got two votes in the AYE category.

You're one to talk, you thread hi-jacking fuck up. Get out of my thread.

Edit: talking about anon

Well, you either bumped your head, are mentally dysfunctional, ingested some peganum harmala with amanita muscaria or simply are infected with severe Christ-psychosis. Remember, I'm NOT making references to posters. MANY neurologists ( again if you would BOTHER to read my links and get educated on the subject) see religous IRRATIONAL and ABSURD beliefs as a form of M.E.N.T.A.L I.L.L.N.E.S.S.
Hey, Gehirn Gestoert, read the books I suggested. Christians are not called Jesus Freaks, Retards, psychos, Bible thumpers and delusional cretins for nothing....Their Christ-psychosis INDUCED delusions are NO DIFFERENT to those of the schizophrenia or TLE sufferer. This is a FACT ( and not mind alone) ask any NEUROLOGISTS....if you aren't able to understand the medical terminology....Please get educated, so you do not keep confirming your ignorance and mental handicap in this forum. Here retard, LEARN by starting with these:
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/special_r.../anhedonia.htm

http://www.namiscc.org/newsletters/July01/borna.htm

http://members.aol.com/wutsamada/phl347/kim3.html

http://members.aol.com/wutsamada/phl347/kim3.html

Here are common symptoms of Christianity and schizophrenia ( NO, I did not write this!!)

http://www.godisamyth.com/regs/ez/webdoc8.htm

Christian suffering a from of illness ( Again, not my work)

http://www.philosophy-religion.org/c.../suffering.htm

http://www.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/cis/.../lecture1.html

http://www.jcnot4me.com/Items/Misc%2...evelations.htm

http://www.geocities.com/satanicus_2/GodHelmet.html

http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?...ode_id=1313416

http://www.marxists.org/reference/su...ks/at/jung.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/577180.stm

http://www.aracnet.com/~kbuxton/memes.html

anon. I can see right through you. You were born into a Christianity infected family, having a brain genetically propense to this psychosis, you were not able to dismiss the Christ-psychosis induced fantasies for the delusions they were...so, the fact that someone is exposing Christianity for the schizophrenia type delusional beliefs inducing illness it is, BOTHERS you. Deep inside you know it is true!..this is the reason you are becoming so defensive and are in DENIAL of the TRUTH. It is obvious for if it quacks like a duck, swims like a duck and flies like a duck......you just have to LEARN to accept your neurological handicap. hey, some people are born short, some are born miopic, some with down's syndrome, some with tourettes, some with acromegalia, some with Morfan's syndrome ( " Some patients with the autoimmune-mediated disorder produce antibodies that bind to ion channels on the motor nerve fibers. This condition, when associated with confusion, hallucinations, and insomnia, is known as Morfan's syndrome. ') and many others. Religious BELIEFS induced DELUSIONS of invisible friends, occurrs also in MORFAN.
So, if the shoe fits wear it!!.....but do not tell me I'm the ONLY one that KNOWS religious beliefs are a form of NEUROLOGICAL DISORDER. The cause however, as many others, remains idiopathic.....:cool:

At this point, I would expect the resident psychiatrists and psychologists to chime in.

What, neuroscientists and doctorates of other cognitive fields don't count?

And you better look at your brain, get an MRI if possible...and first of all get EDUCATED in the neurological field. What is it to you if a 'poster' disagrees with me? is the poster a NEUROLOGISTS? that's what matters!..just READ the books I suggested and LOOK into the links..and please look at neurological institutes throughout the world, not only in the US.

Alas, even the brain can be STIMULATED and INDUCED to have "feelings of the supernatural" ( god) by simply stimulating its TEMPORAL LOBES...or were you born without them, and instead faith triggers?..:lol:

http://www.geocities.com/satanicus_2/GodHelmet.html

http://www.radionetherlands.nl/featu...030428god.html

even DRUGS can make the brain FEEL and SEE GOD....so, don't you think DISEASE can't? WHY?''

Here Learn about neurotheology.

http://www.cognitiveliberty.org/neuro/neuronewswk.htm

Again why don't you?..you are obviously the ignoramus here!, who has not even LOOK into the posts I refered to, written by ACREDITED NEUROLOGISTS!...Why? are you afraid I'd be correct and you WRONG?

Please get educated for we can see right through you...and you shine for you ignorance. Cut and pasting non sequiturs articles is indicative of BS ignorance. You can not fool us. Remember, we are mentally healthy folks, aka atheists, which KNOW what we are talking about and can, unlike you, BACK up our comments. So far, you have NOT comment on my links, if you had bother to see them you'd realize how wrong you are....:cool:

We, unlike you, can tell the difference betwen Christ-psychosis induced delusions and reality. That's the problem and the reason you do not make sense, you can not!..take some ziprasidone, or tegretol, it may help..:lol:

Did you bump your head? it would be more interesting if YOU get educate and know what the sciences NEUROLOGY or PSYCHIATRY are. Read the books, All of this is NOT about me, but your disabling Christ-psychosis. REad the links!! Gehirn gestoert..

I've already told anon to shut her pile hole. What else do you want?

Manics who believe in God often experience 'personal communication' with their particular God. Similar traits are seen with schizophrenics (child and adult onset for both disorders). In these cases, the underlying beliefs of the affected are made manifest by their hallucinations. These are often self feeding, and increase with time.

As for 'regular' theism, I don't consider it to be a psychological disorder (likewise, there is now 'theism' criteria on the DSM-IV-TR), but rather a result of the normal socialization process. When everyone around you believes X, you will probably end up believing X as well. With large numbers of people saying one thing, people tend to nod in compliance, even when they believe it's wrong (and even to the point of beleiving it's right). For example, you can convince a person that two lines of unequal (clearly) length (about 75 vs 100) are actually equal. Even when later questioned individually, they will maintain that the lines are the same length.

Anon, you have not been a victim of libel as this is an internet forum, and you are using a fake name. Unless you can prove that all of us calling you an asshat has caused you undo mental anguish, damaged your reputation in your community/workplace, etc., I kindly ask you to shut the fuck up about legal matters in which you know nothing about.

Anon,

I honestly wouldn't have believed that I would ever have a problem with someone taking on Cal. But I do. You present your arguements in a disingenuous fashion--you make a bullshit statement--and wrap it in a threat-refer to information that is unsupported save for a few questionable internet based references and then --when confronted with a Phd in the area in question then denigrate that area of study to request statements from a psychiatrist.

When a psychiatrist comes on and makes a statement that you do not agree with; will you then start parsing the types of psychiatrists you will accept? Is there some school that is preferable? Or is it really just that you want the ones who will agree with you?

I will give Cal this small point--being brainwashed from birth into believing something untrue will almost always result in an induced belief that is untrue and matches the basic definition of a mental illness.

I would also point out that psychiatrists -some of them at the very least-have a consensus view of what represents mental illness. These definitions change with time and I have the strong suspicion that some are invented just to put a name on a "syndrome."

Me, I'm going with Scathach. Having read her postings and seen her reason-it makes far mroe sense to me than the pitiful meanderings and arguements ad nauseum of a miffed soccer mom internet troll with all this moral certitude-yet seems unable to state--I amy be wrong--in an internet community where her true identity isn't actually known.

And the libel threat--oh my stars and garters--please take your ball and go.

Sorry for sleeping while you were waiting for me.

I'm back up now, refreshed, and at work.

Anon, I really don't get what you're trying to say. Sometimes your sentences are decipherable, other times, well, I just ignore them.

Posting every four minutes and awaiting a response is a sign you don't understand how message forums work. I know you're probably west coast, but sorry, I'm not up at 2:30 am my time (usually).

Look. Scathatch is a neuroscientist. Victus, TheJudge, and several others are also professionals in medical fields.

I asked for your credentials. I'm beginning to suspect that your credentials are in the form of patient experience.

I don't care about the profanity, because it really does not matter. It is as hard for me to accept that people are afraid of words as it is for me to accept that people believe in the Sky Faries. I will not restrict or censor the members here unless someone does something so heinous that it requires action.

I remember a time when a member said they wanted to come over and fuck my mother. Most people would ban you for something like that. Instead, I gave them my Dad's address and told them, "The urn is on the fireplace, I'm sure a deposit could be arranged."

And if she were alive today, she would have laughed her ass off about it.

Rhino, what if his name really is anon! :O

Anon, I was wrongly incarcerated in an adolescent psychiatric ward when I was in high school, and I spent most of my time there discussing the nuances of the human psyche with a number of doctors who later tried to talk me into pursuing a career in psychiatry (or at least psychology). I don't have any formal training in the psych-fields, but apparently I have a natural aptitude for understanding the mechinations (and malfunctionings) of the human mind.

I know what psychosis is: "impairment of perception."
I know what schizophrenia is: "inability to distinguish reality from fantasy."
I have observed many of the same symptoms in the religious individuals I've encountered, leading me to conclude that religious devotion is merely another form of schizoprenia and/or psychosis (depending on the individual). Of course, I would never dare to make a sweeping diagnosis, or to try to diagnose anyone I haven't met and interacted with extensively (as opposed, say, to the rightwing doctor who "diagnosed" Terri Shiavo from across the country).

The problem here, which you are perpetuating, is that society discriminates. If Patient X claims that unicorns live in the subterranean caverns of Pluton's moon Charon, he is considered insane; if Patient Y claims that a man died, stayed dead for three days, then came back to life and flew up into the sky, he is considered a Christian. Yet there is an equal amount of evidence to support both claims; which is to say, none. Common sense, actually, seems to support Patient X's claim, which is at least plausible in a scientific sense, as opposed to Patient Y's claim, which is biologically impossible. So why is the unicorn-believer considered insane when the zombie-believer is considered devout?

Because the First Amendment guarantees such broad freedom of expression, except in cases of sedition and slander, serious defamation of character must be proven by the complaintant in order to sustain libel charges. The complaintant must prove actual damages; it he lost his job because of the damage done to his reputation by the lies, or he was attacked and sustained medical injuries and had to pay for hospital care, etc.

Thus, if you work at Taco Bell for $5.75 an hour, and I lie by claiming that you are a schizophrenic psychotic (I don't know if that's a lie, since I don't know you personally), and my lie does not cause you to lose your job or in any way incur any kind of actual damages, you have no libel case. You cannot sue me simply for lying about you, because you cannot prove that my lies caused you any actual losses. You might -- just might -- have a case for putative damages if you can show that you were on your pay to a promotion to supervisor, but my lies caused you to get skipped for said promotion, but that'd be quite a stretch.

Fuck no.

Experimental psychologists, I would argue, probably know more about the field than practicing psychiatrists. Experimental psychologists have to be 100% up to date on all the research in their field. Psychiatrists only need to know consuling techniques, which aren't always backed up by the science (Freudian psycho-analysis, for example).

Your asking for a psychiatrist only demonstrates your lack of understanding about what's going on here.

She's probably just looking for a new provider. An atheist forum is WAY more helpful than an insurance company.

Well, we state in our rules:

"...may be edited/closed/deleted at the forum Moderators’ discretion. Attack the content, not the contributor. "

When a member makes an unwarranted attack on another member, especially if this attack is made within the first few posts, I will step in and mediate. However, reviewing this thread, I see instances where you questioned the definitions of Victus, you were corrected by Victus and Scathatch, then you proceeded to make legal threats toward Scat. My analysis is, basically that the profanity leveled at you was the result of frustration on the part of the members who first attempted to respond to you in a civil (albeit firm) manner. The first disingenious claim was actually made by you: "Also seek psychiatric advice on use of terminology, word, diagnosis and treatment of psychosis, and bi-polar disorder. "

I asked twice for you to present any credentials or referential information to substantiate your claim. These requests were ignored. At that point, you're fair game for those who express their views using words that others might find offensive.

"The RavingAtheist.com can not guarantee the accuracy of any information posted within these forums, and any post solely expresses the views of it's author, not those of the RavingAtheist.com"

Your attempt to bandy about legalese in an effort to, I don't know, scare Scathatch into submission, is not very conducive to a good online discussion. Furthermore, your tirades against Calpurnpiso, which included the statement, "Neither would the judges in American law courts, state or federal courts. " lead me to believe that you may attempt to pursue legal action, which would obviously not stand up in any American court of law, considering the above statement regarding the accuracy of the information clearly spells out that this is an opinion board, and as such, is not subject to laws of libel and slander, excepting those instances where personal information about members is shared publicly, and that personal information and subsequent statements causes tangible damage to the reputation of the target.

Now, if you want to play with the neuros, then please, please tell us about your experience which, in your mind, gives you the foundation from which to make your claims.

Most psychiatrists are MDs, not researchers. I really don't understand what anon is trying to say.

A psychotic episode can be significantly colored by mood. For example, people experiencing a psychotic episode in the context of depression may experience persecutory or self-blaming delusions or hallucinations, while people experiencing a psychotic episode in the context of mania may form grandiose delusions or have an experience of deep religious significance. Although usually distressing and regarded as an illness process, some people who experience psychosis find beneficial aspects and value the experience or revelations that stem from it. - Sims, A. Symptoms in the mind: An introduction to descriptive psychopathology (3rd edition)

I liked All the definitions...
I do not "enjoy" hallucinating... But I am not about to say no to a Euphoric Mania either. *blush*... hehe This"Psychosis is a rational outcome that appears irrational due to our ignorance of it's causality"........
But that is because My Experiences surpass "simple" or "standard" Delusional thinking in the Fact that they Indeed happened and took Physical form. There For they became and actual event. A Happening afterward. We can debate Self Prophesizing, But why bother when we still haven't all decided that we landed on the moon for real.. The Harm of psychosis is the reaction....... if the one Experiencing the Psychosis has done no harm, feels no harm... then the situation is Fine and Considered an anomaly.... Should it turn for the worst, and keep the Entranced person from being able to live a Biologically healthy life, or to the point where the person is harming others.. It's Obvious that it needs to be stopped or Hindered... Altered?.... I for one am not about to stop another person from believing in the Existence in Jesus Christ, experiencing a healing and the like... But once you Force it onto my Belief possess where I do not hold those feelings, a Social human line has been Crossed. My beliefs should not Entangle with another's beliefs.. and Visa Versa. And if in a State of Psychosis one is Asked by Christ to kill another human being, it is bad. Period.... Whether it was Christ or Not is moot. A Moral boundary has been Crossed. Now... if we could Just shake of the Anxiety and Paranoia aspect that is sometimes threaded inside the all too real state of Psychosis we would be less suspicious of one another. But Hey... We aren't perfect now are we? - Anonymous suffer of psychosis.

Anon, I'm not a doctor, psychiatrist, or psychologist. I don't even play one on TV. But in a few minutes, I was able to educate myself just a little bit on this subject. It appears that religious psychosis (and psychopathy) are common, mainstream medical conditions.

Now, would you care to share why you are so passionate about this? I've asked several times, but I think you're just dodging my question.

Well, the more you post, and the more I'm led to research this subject, then I'd have to say, yes, I do think that religious believers are suffering from a form of psychosis. The layman's definition fits quite well: any severe mental disorder in which contact with reality is lost or highly distorted. - Princeton University Wordnet

If someone believes in talking animals, corporeal reanimation, a young Earth, global inundation, animal sacrifice, and a whole host of other concepts not aligned with reality, and giving their money to Creflo Dollar, then yes, I guess they are psychotic. I would also surmise that the deeper they are into these detached beliefs, then the deeper their psychosis.

Let's start slowly here, since that seems to be your speed.

Believing that there might be self-consciously aware intelligent extraterrestrial life -- which you so flippantly call "little green men" -- is not "manic." It is scientifically plausible; if life evolved on this planet, then it is conceivable that life may have evolved elsewhere in the vast sprawl of the cosmos. To claim that it couldn't have happened -- to claim that there is no life anywhere else in the universe -- is irrational based on what little inferences can be made.

UFOs on the other hand are merely unidentified flying objects. If you see an object that is flying and you can't identify it, then you have seen a UFO. Whether those UFOs are related to any kind of self-consciously aware intelligent extraterrestrial life is another matter entirely, and I refer you to the above paragraph for an exploration of that topic. It is not inconceivable, however, that a species that migth have evolved a few hundred-thousand years before humans might, by now, have mastered interstellar travel, and thus be able to commute between their home planet and ours. Of course, any life that far developed probably wouldn't view human beings as intelligent life at all, but merely sentient simians.

Option c] is meaningless unless you outline some actual beliefs.

Incorrect. When you "have psychosis," your belief system tends to be the expression of it. If you cannot properly interpret reality, you may begin to believe that the crashing noise you hear during a thunder storm is an angry man in the sky. Your "belief system" (ie, your Thunder God) is not separate from your psychosis, but emerges from it.

Can it be anything?

Incorrect (and underlining your point doesn't make it any more correct).

As explained above, religious beliefs are just another manifestation of psychosis, which is an inability to properly perceive reality. The religious belief in a creator-being, for example, is the result of the inability to properly perceive reality as the result of a chain of natural processes; when one misinterprets reality as having been designed -- a supposition for which no supporting evidence exists -- then one winds up believing that the universe was created. Again: the belief system emerges from the psychosis.

You have been very simple and very clear. Unfortunately, you have also been incorrect.

It is not hard to understand at all. It is simply incorrect; I am attempting to correct your errors.

Because I am trying to aid you in your understanding of the universe, but you seem to be fighting me on it.

I believe it means that Victus -- one individual -- doesn't consider 'regular' theism to be a psychological disorder.' I didn't think it was that difficult to interpret, but if you need an explanation that badly, I will provide one.

Yes. I do; and I'm sure Cal still does. But you're misusing the word "psychotic." The word "psychosis" refers specifically to an inability to properly perceive reality; the word "psychotic" denotes erratic and dangerous behavior.

I do not think that all religious believers act "psychotically"; but I do think that religious belief is a manifestation of psychosis. Please be more careful when you use these kinds of technical medical terms.

Although I'm not sure why you felt it necessary to capitalize the first three words of that sentence. But que sera.

Religion, from what I can see, is the use (or in terms of seeking accuracy, misuse) of the underlying factors that are generally used to facilitate societal cohesiveness. It's like using superglue to stick a bomb to a bridge, that's not really what it's supposed to do. The theists that 'hear' God and manifest abnormal behaviors in the claim that they perceive God directly in some way, these can be said to be suffering from a psychosis of sorts (having a distorted or diminished view of reality).

Edit: But the majority of theists most likely fall under the former (social cohesiveness) rather than the latter (christ-psychosis).

As such, one can argue that a large group of people are following christ-psychotics are like remora on a shark.

Anon. Gratias tibi ago ( thanks) for PROVING my point that religious beliefs are a form of psychosis..ergo..my postulated Christ-psychosis. You faulty perception of reality, demonstrated in your posts, is a classic example of what this neurological disorder does. Many that didn't agree with me before, now do!!

Remember, you are in a forum composed of mentaly healthy people, aka atheists, which, unlike you, are able to tell between FANTASY ( religious fairy tales) and REALITY. I'm certain that if you discuss your point of view and distorted ideas with the patients at a mental health clinic you'd make perfect sense to them, and they to you.

I suggest you take ziprasidone, wait 15 mts, then post, and you'll see the difference!! .....and I am serious. Since it is a PROVEN MEDICAL FACT, this chemcial will affect your brain by IMPROVING your perception of reality, you'd have made my point, the taking of one of my JETs ( jesus existence tests), and further discussions which time after time proves you wrong, will not be necessary. Try it.....and...why don't you PRAY to jesus that the chemicals do not affect you...then, you'd have created another JET for me.

Do not forget, crazy is as crazy thinks and does, since delusions accepted as reality are ALWAYS in control. :cool:

Well; which is it? Fortunate or unfortunate?

Yeah, no shit. You're surprised that we have varying opinions here?

Oh, that's right; you come from the sheeple mentality of the hive-mind where you think what your pastor tells you to think.

So yes, we atheists do express different opinions on this site. On this topic, I tend to agree with Cal in many cases. So you can stop stating the obvious now.

Can we ban anon just for being an idiot, or do we need to find something else?

There you go again, flaunting your wacco synapses, with pride..:lol:

You said, making a FALSE assumption due to your reality distorting anomaly, the following: "and that only ONE poster here always equates believers with being psychotic. "

Did I say that CHILDREN, who normally are BELIEVERS in fantasies to be reality, are psychotic? It all DEPENDS what the BELIEF is, and WHAT it is based on!!!.

What it is viewed as a mentally healthy belief, is when the belief IS based on a distiction between an absurd irrational concept ( i,e resurrecting Jesus, tooth fairy, Alien abductions, possesing demons, etc) and a tangible reality ( when a person dies it decomposes, if a glass is dropped on a concrete floor it'll brake, etc), IOW empirical deductions, based on reason. An educated person that accept fantasies equally as delusional as those found on very young children, as empirically demonstrable, the person is exhibiting the same symptoms as those diagnosed with schizophrenia or TLE sufferer.

You seem to ignore this fact and distort the definition of belief!. Which ones of these statements of belief, by EDUCATED PEOPLE, are mentally healthy and which ones are not, in your opinion:

" I believe if I jump from the top of this building I'll brake my leg or die.'
' I believe if I pray and jump from this building nothing will happen to me"
" I believe if I take these herbs and pray to Jesus, my cancer will be cured."
" I'll believe if have my body preserved after death, I'll resurrect as Osiris said"
" I believe I can create thoughts and gods with my brain if I ingest amanita muscaria"
" I believe if I summon spirits with this prayers, they'll show up"
' I believe in one god that died and resurrected to save me from the sin committed by the mud man and rib woman he had created when they accepted a forbidden fruit offered by a talking snake"

Not matter the way one looks at it, the acceptance of ABSURD fantasies induced BELIEFS ( what ALL religious beliefs have in common) by educated people as REAL, is symptomatic of psychosis. These anomaly can be found in schizophrenia sufferer and Temporal lobe epileptics. One will not find "religious is a mental illness", in any neurological book, but the IMPLICATIONS and SIMILARITIES of religious beliefs to a form of psychosis is there for all to see. One have to CONNECT the dots to understand it.

Get educated, read the books I posted. Unless you enjoy been ignorant, living in a wolrd of christ-psychosis induced delusions...:)

I guess we don't have a psychiatrist on board.

Did you miss where I stated, Anon, I'm not a doctor, psychiatrist, or psychologist. I don't even play one on TV. But in a few minutes, I was able to educate myself just a little bit on this subject. It appears that religious psychosis (and psychopathy) are common, mainstream medical conditions.

Now, would you care to share why you are so passionate about this? I've asked several times, but I think you're just dodging my question.

Oh, and I also said, ...I do think that religious believers are suffering from a form of psychosis. The layman's definition fits quite well: any severe mental disorder in which contact with reality is lost or highly distorted. - Princeton University Wordnet

If someone believes in talking animals, corporeal reanimation, a young Earth, global inundation, animal sacrifice, and a whole host of other concepts not aligned with reality, and giving their money to Creflo Dollar, then yes, I guess they are psychotic. I would also surmise that the deeper they are into these detached beliefs, then the deeper their psychosis.

Psychosis has multiple definitions. Why don't you provide a reference to the one you're using? My point is clearly stated that I am not using the term in a clinical sense. It doesn't mean that I'm making a medical diagnosis, nor is Cal, so I cannot understand your persistence. It seems irrational.

You are making a huge deal of this. Why?

And why are you ignoring so many posts? I'm not the only one that is asking the same thing repeatedly.

Unless you respond in kind, and answer some of these questions, I'm through with this topic.

Anon wrote:

"when the patient happens to be an atheist-psychosis"

:lol::lol::lol:......there is NOT SUCH A THING. This is an oxymoron!!..it is like saying a cool flame!..man are you infected...sad. I suggest you get true salvation by visiting a neurologist...:lol: atheist-psychosis...!!:lol: Gehirn gestoert..

My vote goes to ban the little shitgoblin for ignoring Ten's requests to state her qualifications/source of expertise in this area, aside from crappy Google searches.

My next vote goes to Cal and his supreme analysis of psychotic theists.

My best and last vote goes to Anthony in 2016.

<insert anon repellent SHIT FUCK ASS COCKSOCKET here>

We call that... *drumroll* ...a psychosis.

Ignoring evidence infront of you while in support of something unsubstantiated and down right proovably wrong is called magical thinking, it is inherent to most disorder involving delusions and hallucinations (they wouldn't really be delusions if someone could just wave them away with a logical argument). While most theists, of course, do not meet criteria for clinical disorders, they do, as a population, have a tendency towards magical thinking. This puts the "one step" closer to disorder than other populations.

Presumes atheism is a delusion, when it's actually based on reason, logic and evidence.

Idiot.

No, I'm an experimental psychologist. Unlike you, I get my information from peer reviewed journals and textbooks, not google.

I work on experiments with psychopathological patients. I don't mean to come off as arrogant, but I'm pretty sure I know more than you in these matters.

Oh! Parting is such sweet sorrow! Anon, good nurse, anon!!

Criminy, bitch, enough with the drama and just FUCK OFF already!

Thankyou.

You're welcome, Dr. Victus. I'm afraid the prognosis is grim, however. You have a shitgoblin invasion problem.
This particular breed is tenacious and causes superficial irritation and inflammation.

<FUCK SHIT PISS ASSHAT>

I recommend we administer selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI's) as a counter to the deficited thalamus activation in anon.

Goodbye.

:lol::lol:...Did you bump your head or were you born that way, with a flat head? what is ISM has to do with psychosis and neurology?...there are MANY words on the English langiage that end with ISM and had NOTHING to do with neurology. Atheism, btw, means LACK OF BELIEF!!!,,,,for the umpteen time. Hey retard LOOK into the ETYMOLOGY of the word. a=WITHOUT, theos=GOD/BELIEF..this means NO BELIEF. So a syllogism, morphism, altruism, assholism, stupidism, are all related to NON BELIEF and NEUROLOGY?......man you are ignorant and psychotic to boot.....:(

hmmm..I though you said goodbye?....or is it that your Christ-psychosis induced masochism begs for more brain pounding?.....:lol:
Remember, we can see through you. Deep inside you KNOW you have full blown Christ-psychosis, and it is a problem that bothers you inmensely. You are simply in denial about your neurological disorder that makes you accept an invisible friend as you advisor and guide in life!!.........Sad.

..psss..your mommy is calling you...:lol:

I do, actually.

Anon did not reply to specific questions.

Anon said goobye.

Anon came back.

Anon said, "and Cal, don't come and give me the bag about creation science."

Cal never mentioned Creation Science or ID in the entire thread.

Anon went on to write another four paragraphs related to a subject Cal never presented.

Tenspace got really tired of Anon's monopolization of Tenspace's time.

Tenspace banned Anon.

Ten, would you like a free wallpaper for your PC?

?????????????????????.......i suggest you see a neurologist. Christ-psychosis is going to make you foam of the mouth then talk about the life of centipedes on the Congo!!..:lol:.....you have truly a mental problem and it is related the susceptibility of your brain to serotonin delusion starving neurons. I'm not joking...:(

Only if there are no strings attached. ;)

Anything in particular you want on it?

Anything that would make Maddox proud.

Dinosaurs. And Pirates. And a sissy man being pummeled and/or eaten. By the Dinosaurs. And Pirates.

:D

Pirates riding dinosaurs that snatch sissy men up in their slashing jaws of death!

Thanks for banning the shitgoblin, Ten. Maybe now she'll re-focus on finding that new provider. You did everyone a favor here.

xoxox
Kate

See; there are happy endings in real-life.

The only true happy ending here would be to see everyone THIS fucking stupid drawn and quartered - preferably by dinosaurs.

Could the dinosaurs be dressed like pirates?

gaww....don't be stupid :P


:)

No, the traditional garb for dinosaurs are Nazi armbands and SS medals.

Only the carnivores, Ten. The herbavores get those shabby black-and-white-striped concentration camp uniforms.

Was it Schrack who said that all dinosaurs were herbavores prior to the fall, or was that Salty?

I get these fucking idiots mixed up, but to be fair they're really all the same.

Ok I'm for compromise. Can we keep the armbands and medals but throw in an eye-patch?

Does Amazon.com giftwrap?

Damn straight. Eye patches were popular with Nazis, so it is acceptable for the dinos to wear them as well.

Yeah, it was StB, but Salty is a YEC too, so he must accept that, since it's part of their Origins theory.

:lol: