Re: Consensus? We don't need no stinkin' consensus...
At Mon, 12 Mar 2001 18:43:55 -0600 (CST), Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com> wrote:
Resentment? I'm not resentful. I'm engulfed in a melange of shock, horror, and hillarity. The insanity of man against man, and the hoops they'll jump through to get satisfaction. After all, it's not entertainment but satisfaction that is what drives mankind.
PAPD Ambivalence: PAPD ambivalence is expressed behaviorally by vacillation between negativism/autonomy and dependency/conformity. However, even when conforming, these individuals tend to be contrary, unaccommodating, sulking, pessimistic, and complaining (Kubacki & Smith, Retzlaff, ed., 1995, p. 175). People with PAPD will behave obediently one time and defiantly the next. They will be self-deprecating and express guilt for failing to meet expectations in one situation and express stubborn negativism and resistance in another. They fluctuate between deference and defiance, between obedience and aggressive negativism. Their behavior will go from explosive anger or stubbornness to periods of guilt and shame (Millon & Davis, Clarkin & Lenzenweger, eds., 1996, p. 309).
What consensus might that be? The 'crypto-anarchy' good-old-boy consensus? The Freidman'esk "making money justifies all wrongs" contingent? The "It's wrong they regulate any of my actions, but I'm going to regulate yours."? team. Or perhaps "I'm too damn lazy to start my own node and take the heat but I'll sure bitch and whine when others don't do as I say" clan?
Individuals with PAPD will express their rage overtly and directly. Aggressive PAPD behavior is intended to inflict discomfort, hurt, harm, injury, or destruction. These individuals have a disposition toward anger and aggression -- referred to irritability (Lish, et.al., Costello, ed., 1996, p. 32). They may have temper tantrums that release pent-up aggression; if their victim is aggressive in response -- so much the better. That response is then used to vindicate the initial attack. Anger expressed by commission is usually justified by laudable motives, e.g. concern for the well-being of the victim. The expression of the anger is dictated by the desire to wound while concealing the intention to wound -- even the existence of the anger. This is not to spare the feelings of the victim but to wound them more effectively. The intent is to provoke counteranger with such subtlety that the victim blames himself and believes his anger is not justified. That way, people with PAPD can assume the role of innocent victim (Kantor, 1992, pp. 178-180). They may make directly hostile statements because they fail to perceive their own motivating attitude, perceive their hostility too late, or believe that their attitude can be concealed.
There is no authority on 'the' list because there are 8 lists that share a common backbone (by consensus of the operators, not users, I might add). The only parties who have authority to impose any sort of list behaviour regulations are the specific operators of those mail reflectors. We have several that limit what goes out to their subscribers, I don't believe we have any that limit what their subscribers may submit. However, that is clearly within the scope of the current agreement. Start a list and filter both ends. A 2-way list if you will ;)
Individuals with passive-aggressive (negativistic) personality disorder utilize three main strategies to defend themselves: displacement, externalization, and opposition. The most consistent PAPD defense mechanism is displacement. These individuals shift their anger away from more powerful targets to those of lesser significance. They express their hostility toward others who are less likely to be able to retaliate or reject them.
I would think that a group so sophisticated as you claim to be, and as motivated by money would recognize the simple dicta "Money speaks". What you boys are pissed off 'bout is that it's my money doin' the speakin' and it ain't what ya expected.
People with PAPD externalize their focus and cannot accept blame for any of their shortcomings (Stone, 1993, p. 361). They deny or refuse awareness of their own provocative behavior, the serious negative consequences of their maladaptive responses, and responsibility for the behavioral choices they make. Instead, they focus on the many grievances they have toward others. They focus on the behavior of others and externalize responsibility for their destructive actions.
The majority of subscribers don't ever post, they sit there and get the occassional techie item and sit about laughing their asses off. I'm glad they find joy and humor in this. It is after all hilarious at times.
This behavior is often well tolerated in highly conflicted family systems. They will also find a place in work settings where there are relatively few consequences to nonproductive behavior and there are either few rewards or rewards are distributed arbitrarily (Richards, 1993, p. 259). PAPD behavior is basically oppositional and provocative. While these individuals may seem, on occasion, to be compliant and agreeable, they are judgmental, irritable, and easily frustrated. They resist adequate performance through stubbornness, forgetfulness, lateness, deliberate inefficiency, and procrastination (Sperry & Carlson, 1993, p. 336). The opposite of the behavior appropriate to a given situation is the one most likely to be expressed by individuals with PAPD -- hence the negativistic personality.
Do what you will, start your own list, filter me, start another node, keep bitching. Whatever. If I have something to say I'm going to say it. I'll do my best to keep it short and too the point. I don't make any promise it will be related to any point you might have however.
After all, how serious can you take somebody who is more concerned about the word 'whore' and 'police' in the same sentence than the fact that the sentence is even being considered at all? Pull your head out of your ass. If western civilization is going to tumble down because of my .sig
These individuals express an irritable or sour mood; aggression is usually pouting and complaining. They are frequently depressed or sulking and gain perverse pleasure in raining on everyone's parade -- even their own (Richards, 1993, p. 258). These individuals focus on the negative; they are moody and pessimistic (Beck & Freeman, 1990, p. 334). It is typical for passive-aggressive individuals to be cynical, doubting, and untrusting. They approach most events in their lives with a measure of disbelief and skepticism. Future possibilities are approached with trepidation. Most tend to be whiny and grumbling in their approach to life and voice disdain and caustic comments toward people who are experiencing good fortune (Millon & Davis, 1996, p. 551). These individuals tend to be quite articulate in describing their discomfort but rarely explore or seek to understand what is wrong. They do not recognize their own inner conflicts as contributing to their difficulties. They are often preoccupied with personal inadequacies, body ailments, and guilt; this alternates with equal preoccupation with social resentment, frustration, and disillusionment. They complain about the sorry state of their lives; they would like to feel better but seem unable or unwilling to find a solution to their difficulties (Millon, 1981, p. 255). then
it's already dead.
They may remain unaware of the implications of their behavior or words (Kantor, 1992, p. 178). PAPD avoidance of taking responsibility for the provocative consequences of anger produces paranoid overtones. These individuals are often surprised at the response they provoke; they typically deny having given cause for the angry responses they receive or they accuse others of overreacting. Many of these individuals will endure growing isolation rather than alter or give up what they believe to be their right to free expression (Kantor, 1992, p. 182). Major depressive episodes are not uncommon. In the PAPD depressive cycles, there is evidence of a tendency to blame others, a demanding and complaining attitude, and low self-confidence. These individuals are most likely to experience chronic dysthymia. Typically, individuals with PAPD display an agitated dysphoria, shifting between anxious futility and self-deprecation to demanding irritability and bitter discontent (Millon, 1996, pp. 198-199).
Duh.
The passive-aggressive personality disorder might be described as a compulsive personality with an attitude. Free, encrypted, secure Web-based email at www.hushmail.com
An anonymous twit writes:
Anger expressed by commission is usually justified by laudable motives, e.g. concern for the well-being of the victim. The expression of the anger is dictated by the desire to wound while concealing the intention to wound -- even the existence of the anger. This is not to spare the feelings of the victim but to wound them more effectively. The intent is to provoke counteranger with such subtlety that the victim blames himself and believes his anger is not justified. That way, people with PAPD can assume the role of innocent victim (Kantor, 1992, pp. 178-180). They may make directly hostile statements because they fail to perceive their own motivating attitude, perceive their hostility too late, or believe that their attitude can be concealed.
Can't we do without Victimologist prattle on a cryptography and privacy list? Shrinks should be next after all the lawyers are fed to the lions. "Medicalizing" your opponent's argument, instead of responding to it, is a tactic of police states, religious nuts, controlling relatives, and idiots. Which one are you? -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
At 05:51 PM 3/12/01 -0800, Eric Cordian wrote:
Can't we do without Victimologist prattle on a cryptography and privacy list? Shrinks should be next after all the lawyers are fed to the lions.
"Medicalizing" your opponent's argument, instead of responding to it, is a tactic of police states, religious nuts, controlling relatives, and idiots.
Which one are you?
Do you deny that there are clusters of mental symptoms which seem empirically to have organic causes? Even syndromes with mere software (talk-talk solvable) causes? Don't throw out the baby with the gulag. dh
On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Eric Cordian wrote:
"Medicalizing" your opponent's argument, instead of responding to it, is a tactic of police states, religious nuts, controlling relatives, and idiots.
Which one are you?
Shit, there's a diff? Sometimes I sits and think, and somtimes I just sits. I think I'll sits and think on that one :) ____________________________________________________________________ If the law is based on precedence, why is the Constitution not the final precedence since it's the primary authority? The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, David Honig wrote:
At 05:51 PM 3/12/01 -0800, Eric Cordian wrote:
"Medicalizing" your opponent's argument, instead of responding to it, is a tactic of police states, religious nuts, controlling relatives, and idiots.
Which one are you?
Do you deny that there are clusters of mental symptoms which seem empirically to have organic causes?
Sure, such symptoms exist. Hell, if you define "Normal" narrowly enough, ninety-nine percent plus of the population has 'em. Including you. Wouldn't you rather allow a pretty broad definition of normalcy rather than start on the thorny issues resulting from allowing *ANY* group of people to start making definitions of normalcy which, sooner or later, may not include you? In fact, a lot of traits that are maladaptive on an individual level (such as paranoia and being fat) are actually beneficial on a larger scale -- a certain number of paranoids will always survive the 'unexpected' (to others) betrayals, and a certain number of fat people will always survive the next famine. Extreme personalities (and physiognomies) are just nature's way of keeping the species alive, by pre-adapting a small percentage of us to survive the hardships and reverses that may challenge the 'normal' population on any given day. Please don't start in with a line that says "it isn't average and therefore it isn't legitimate." Bear
At 09:22 PM 3/12/01 -0800, Ray Dillinger wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, David Honig wrote:
At 05:51 PM 3/12/01 -0800, Eric Cordian wrote:
"Medicalizing" your opponent's argument, instead of responding to it, is a tactic of police states, religious nuts, controlling relatives, and idiots.
Which one are you?
Do you deny that there are clusters of mental symptoms which seem empirically to have organic causes?
Sure, such symptoms exist. Hell, if you define "Normal" narrowly enough, ninety-nine percent plus of the population has 'em.
Absolutely. Even things which are from the outside dysfunctional should not be treated if the person doesn't want it treated. Masochism is legal. And yes, mental traits vary will a normal curve much like any other trait. (A rather un PC observation, but true)
Including you.
My idiosyncracies are not the issue here, Bear.
Wouldn't you rather allow a pretty broad definition of normalcy rather than start on the thorny issues resulting from allowing *ANY* group of people to start making definitions of normalcy which, sooner or later, may not include you?
Yep, *whether or not* I feel endangered.
In fact, a lot of traits that are maladaptive on an individual level (such as paranoia and being fat) are actually beneficial on a larger scale -- a certain number of paranoids will always survive the 'unexpected' (to others) betrayals, and a certain number of fat people will always survive the next famine.
Whatever. In any case, I'm asserting only that certain (modern-med & layperson) defined syndromes exist. And that their identification and treatment is not political witchcraft, no matter how abused for political witchhunting it may be. A biological mechanic (ie, doctor) is obligated to use the history of human experience (ie, clustering of symptoms) in classifying and treating disease. If you know how to do better, pray tell. ...... The existence of gulags does not prove the non-existence of real malfunctions. ...... If you still think me a psychofascist, then let me recommend anything by Thomas Szasz MD, PhD Prof of Psychiatry NYU(?) and after reading it on my recommendation you may chastise me.
participants (5)
-
alugerļ¼ hushmail.com -
David Honig -
Eric Cordian -
Jim Choate -
Ray Dillinger