Schizoid Personality Disorder

[Warlord]

Then you must be an idiot. How else shall we explain your incompetence when it comes to simple understanding of basic facts?


I really hate having superfluous discussions with idiots, but since you insist on spreading totally false information, I feel obliged to correct you so that the non-idiots will not get the wrong ideas about this.

More than one list of diagnostic criteria have been in use during the years, and they can often complement each other. Gillberg has suggested a list of his own, and that list is usually included when other experts try to explain what Asperger's Syndrome is. You can find Gillberg's list in for example Tony Attwood's classical work Asperger's Syndrome: A Guide for Parents and Professionals. (I haven't yet read his new book The Complete Guide to Asperger's Syndrome, so I don't know for sure if you will find it there, but my guess is that you will.)


I have read some 20-30 books on Asperger and quite a lot of articles. I have also read some books on personality disorders, including the main psychiatric manuals and Kretschmer's studies from the first decades of the last century -- and of course also as many articles I have been able to find.


First of all, most people with Asperger have no more damaged brains than for example homosexuals. You are born with the condition; it is not a disease, but you have a brain that functions slightly differently from what is considered to be a "normal" brain. You are better at some things and worse at others.

And we don't know that schizoid brains are physiologically "normal". That would be so unlikely that we can probably dismiss it as impossible. Every trait of behaviour and attitude has a correlation with a brain structure, so the schizoids cannot really have "normal" brains.


You have demonstrated very clearly that the little you know about Asperger is incorrect. And everything I have said about the condition is correct so far. I certainly know the basics, and I know the rest of it too -- in much more depth than you do.


Exactly what you should do here. Start reading about the subject.

LOL

You managed to address/counter none of the points I made. Instead you just proved why you fail to understand.

Just because you state that you are correct, and I'm incorrect, does not make it so. The problem is that you are never able to prove or show, why I'm wrong. While I can show why you are. That's the difference of actually being wrong and right, get it?

Because you have read 20-30 books doesn't mean that you actually understand any of it. It just makes you arrogant enough to believe that you do.

Isn't it rather pointless to keep re-iterating Gillberg? A list that has been accepted by the general medical community is probably more reliable than a list proposed by someone who conducts research that has been scrutinized of being unscientific, by numerous people. For example by Per-Anders Rydelius Professor of Child Psychiatry at the Karolinska Institute and others.

With that rant about Asperger's brain you only showed how you simply can't get a point. Calling it "different" is just politically correct bullshit, and beside the point.

And we don't know that schizoid brains are physiologically "normal"

We (this excludes you apparently) know it the same exact way, as we know that AS brains are "different" (as you like to call them).

The point is: everything isn't connected to AS. Despite your world revolving around Asperger's Syndrome. One of the reasons why you are wrong, is that you are unable to distance yourself from it, and therefore seeing things from an objective angle.

[Phaedrus]

Just because you state that you are correct, and I'm incorrect, does not make it so.

No, but in this case it is a fact. If you think that I am wrong, you think that the experts on Asperger are wrong, because they say the same things as I say. I only explain the basics that you can read about everywhere. It is incomprehensible that you can misinterpret the sources to that extent.

Because you have read 20-30 books doesn't mean that you actually understand any of it. It just makes you arrogant enough to believe that you do.

I can see that you don't understand. You only happen to believe that I am wrong, but you can't see it because you haven't read nearly enough about this subject -- a fact that you have yourself proven by what you say about Asperger. There is no point in discussing this with you, since you refuse to read the basic sources of information.

The point is: everything isn't connected to AS.

How stupid are you, really? How can you make such a totally irrelevant comment in a thread about SPD?

[Warlord]

No, but in this case it is a fact. If you think that I am wrong, you think that the experts on Asperger are wrong, because they say the same things as I say. I only explain the basics that you can read about everywhere. It is incomprehensible that you can misinterpret the sources to that extent.

I can see that you don't understand. You only happen to believe that I am wrong, but you can't see it because you haven't read nearly enough about this subject -- a fact that you have yourself proven by what you say about Asperger. There is no point in discussing this with you, since you refuse to read the basic sources of information.

I agree with the experts. "My experts" just happen to be highly regarded in the scientific and medical community, from highly valued medical schools & universities. Not people who forge research results, brake the scientific and medical research standards, and are convicted of misuse of office. Like "your experts". That's the difference.

Just because you state that you are correct, and I'm incorrect, does not make it so. The problem is that you are never able to prove or show, why I'm wrong. While I can show why you are. That's the difference of actually being wrong and right

GET IT? Or do I have to repeat this endlessly?

The point is: everything isn't connected to AS.

How stupid are you, really? How can you make such a totally irrelevant comment in a thread about SPD?

It's you who started to talk about Asperger's in a thread about SPD. Not me.

[Phaedrus]

Just because you state that you are correct, and I'm incorrect, does not make it so. The problem is that you are never able to prove or show, why I'm wrong. While I can show why you are. That's the difference of actually being wrong and right

GET IT? Or do I have to repeat this endlessly?

You have to repeat it endlessly.

It's you who started to talk about Asperger's in a thread about SPD. Not me.

Yes, I did. And there was a reason for it. The reason was that SPD and Asperger are very similar phenomena, and many experts are inclined to believe that they might in fact be the same condition, or at least one of them being a sub-condition of the other.

[Warlord]

Yes, I did. And there was a reason for it. The reason was that SPD and Asperger are very similar phenomena, and many experts are inclined to believe that they might in fact be the same condition, or at least one of them being a sub-condition of the other.

And the overall medical community disargrees with this opinion of these "many experts" that you speak of, for the simple facts I mentioned earlier. Saying "many experts" isn't a proof of anything btw.

The main expert you mention is someone who is higly criticized, forges research results, brakes the scientific and medical research standards, and is convicted of misuse of office. Someone like that has very low credibility.

Yet you claim as if this opinion is undeniable fact, only because you think it's so. And that opinion is motivated by your wish to see that kind of connection and Gillberg-worship. It has absolutely no base in anything factual. The fact is that it's in opposition of the view of the medical community.

You don't have to start to talk about Asperger's syndrome at every possible chance you get. That is "totally irrelevant and stupid".