Donald Trump has 'dangerous mental illness', say psychiatry experts at Yale conferenc

Status
Not open for further replies.
Argumemnon said:
"Still" implies that he already won it.
Click to expand...
"Popular vote" is the not universally understood term.

Argumemnon said:
It's like a nightmarish version of a chat bot.
Click to expand...
It's probably more lack of experience than insanity.

A seasoned politician can talk the pants off an interviewer without saying anything. In time, Trump should be able to develop a similar skill.
 
Last edited:
psionl0 said:
"Popular vote" is the not universally understood term.


It's probably more lack of experience than insanity.

A seasoned politician can talk the pants off an interviewer without saying anything. In time, Trump should be able to develop a similar skill.
Click to expand...
Trump has been giving media interviews for decades, he doesn't seem to have learnt much in all that time. I would say the evidence is against him being able to learn.
 
psionl0 said:
It's probably more lack of experience than insanity.

A seasoned politician can talk the pants off an interviewer without saying anything. In time, Trump should be able to develop a similar skill.
Click to expand...

Trump has had his entire adult life to develop his speaking skills.
He made it his mission to make himself front page news in New York
for decades.

He is 70 years old now.

How much more time should he be given to develop
the ability to speak in whole sentences?
 
psionl0 said:
What lesson is supposed to be taught? That you must only vote for vertical thinking Democrats?
Click to expand...

You think every Republican is as self-absorbed, ignorant and incompetent as Trump?

There are plenty of reasonable candidates out there of whatever political stripe. Trump wasn't one of them.
 
quadraginta said:
Do you believe that it is impossible for professionals in the field to make an accurate diagnosis without personal interviews, regardless of how much other available data there is?

Or do you think only that it is unethical to arrive at such a diagnosis publicly, regardless of whether or not it is based in fact?

Should they keep silent out of some arbitrary ethical principle, even if their concern is justified by an abundance of evidence, and the welfare of the country is at stake?

Also, what is this ethical principle based on? Are professional groups condemning these statements and calling for the responsible parties to lose their licenses?
Click to expand...

I don't know whether diagnosis requires personal interviews, but I do think publicly discussing diagnoses is an issue, whether the person is your patient or not.

I don't know about the actions of professional groups in this regard.
 
quadraginta said:
And a post just upthread also brings up this aspect.

From the OP article;


​

Dueling ethics?

Do you think your command of the ethics involved is superior to someone who not only works in the field, but teaches it?
Click to expand...

I would be more interested in seeing the comments of a medical ethicist.
 
I remain underwhelmed to the point of mild disgust by "professionals" who publicly diagnose peopl they haven't examined.
 
Giz said:
Huh, a lot of folks worried about trump's danger to the USA's democratic process are borrowing a trick from Soviet Russia: declaring political opponents insane.

Not a good look.
Click to expand...

Sometimes people claiming insanity of another are lying for political reasons, other times they are telling the absolute truth. Same for psychiatrists........
With trumpf most actions and responses and decisions seem to most rational persons to indicate some above mid-level mental incompetence. Or highly id-level functionality.
 
snoop_doxie said:
Trump has had his entire adult life to develop his speaking skills.
He made it his mission to make himself front page news in New York
for decades.

He is 70 years old now.

How much more time should he be given to develop
the ability to speak in whole sentences?
Click to expand...

How is that better than interweaving three sentences into one? Give Trump his due, man.
 
psionl0 said:
"Popular vote" is the not universally understood term.
Click to expand...

:confused: Really?

psionl0 said:
It's probably more lack of experience than insanity.

A seasoned politician can talk the pants off an interviewer without saying anything. In time, Trump should be able to develop a similar skill.
Click to expand...

No, he is trying to convince the interviewer that he doesn't watch TV shows that are critical of him but gets himself in a bind because he had just said that he does. He almost seems to be implying that he's developed a psychic sense of when not to watch, but at any rate he wants us to be impressed that he's "developed this ability" to not watch himself being criticized. WTF?

There's more to it than the simple fact that he's lying, again (one insider says he "hate-watches" critical shows late at night while on the phone with friends, and that he does still watch at least the beginning of Morning Joe to see if they're talking about him). There's more to it than the fact that he irrationally considers anything critical to be "fake news." In denying that he even watches such shows, he's apparently become hyper-sensitive to criticism about being hyper-sensitive to criticism. His only defense is denial, but denying that it bothers him isn't enough; he wants us to believe that it can't bother him because he doesn't even watch it.

Who is he really trying to convince -- us or himself? Would a sane person really expect either to work?
 
'i didn't think i would lose the ability to stop watching anything about myself'
is this... i mean apart from calling it an ability... am i ...
 
Argumemnon said:
Lack of experience? The man's been giving interviews, doing TV shows and negociating deals for decades on end. What extra experience do you think he needs to be speaking coherently?
Click to expand...
It's a different ball game when you are a politician.

I actually understood that he doesn't like CNN in that interview. A true politician would never have given away so much information in an interview. They know that every word they utter is potentially a weapon for their opponents.
 
psionl0 said:
It's a different ball game when you are a politician.

I actually understood that he doesn't like CNN in that interview. A true politician would never have given away so much information in an interview. They know that every word they utter is potentially a weapon for their opponents.
Click to expand...

The interest here isn't whether he speaks strategically. It is whether he speaks coherently at all. This is both in terms of syntax (the man cannot utter a sentence even approaching grammatical correctness and coherence) and in terms of the broader picture (in a short snippet of interview, he both confirms and denies watching CNN in one breath).

You're pretending that we're talking about how he fails to respond like a seasoned politician, when in fact we're talking about inability to speak like an adult and the appearance of an addled mind.
 
theprestige said:
Sure there is. I can think of at least two, offhand.

But it's funny how "talks like a politician" is suddenly a positive character trait--just in time to determine Trump doesn't have it.
Click to expand...

No, speaking like an adult capable of clear reasoning is a positive character trait.

This isn't about the ability to dishonestly deflect a question.
 
psionl0 said:
Answered by the part of the post that you didn't quote.
Click to expand...

No it wasn't. In fact, it has nothing to do with the part I did quote. That's why I didn't include it. But boy, do posters love to point out that parts of their posts weren't quoted. What an affront, right?

How does this:

I actually understood that he doesn't like CNN in that interview. A true politician would never have given away so much information in an interview. They know that every word they utter is potentially a weapon for their opponents.
Click to expand...

...explain why he's incoherent?
 
phiwum said:
Speaking of expressing a coherent thought, if you have something to say, please try words. I'm not so good at animated GIFs.
Click to expand...
Affectation of ignorance ("I don't understand you therefore you must be talking nonsense") is one of the ways you can dishonestly deflect a question. Good politicians know all the tricks.

Actually, I have known of a number of politicians who didn't appear to talk well in interviews. Some stuttered, some swore, some had nervous ticks etc. They provided great fodder for stand up comedians but some had very successful careers. So Trump botching an interview doesn't really prove anything one way or another.
 
psionl0 said:
Affectation of ignorance ("I don't understand you therefore you must be talking nonsense") is one of the ways you can dishonestly deflect a question. Good politicians know all the tricks.

Actually, I have known of a number of politicians who didn't appear to talk well in interviews. Some stuttered, some swore, some had nervous ticks etc. They provided great fodder for stand up comedians but some had very successful careers. So Trump botching an interview doesn't really prove anything one way or another.
Click to expand...
I never claimed it was a sign of mental illness. (I used the term "addled" in a purely informal sense. )

It's clear that Trump is an exceptionally poor speaker. Maybe that's a strategy or maybe just a liability. I tend to think the latter.
 
quadraginta said:
He should be congratulated for his syphilis.
Click to expand...
It can't be syphilis.

Remember, Trump's "Personal Vietnam" was his ability to avoid STDs in the 70s.

http://people.com/politics/trump-bo...nas-are-landmines-it-was-my-personal-vietnam/

“It’s amazing, I can’t even believe it. I’ve been so lucky in terms of that whole world, it is a dangerous world out there. It’s like Vietnam, sort of. It is my personal Vietnam. I feel like a great and very brave solider,” Trump said in the interview when Howard Stern asked how he handled making sure he wasn’t contracting STDs from the women he was sleeping with. The business-mogul-turned-politician elaborated on the fact in the interview, calling women’s vaginas “potential landmines” and saying “there’s some real danger there.”
 
psionl0 said:
Is that what I was supposed to be explaining?
Click to expand...

Well, yes. That is what we are discussing here.

You said this:

I actually understood that he doesn't like CNN in that interview. A true politician would never have given away so much information in an interview. They know that every word they utter is potentially a weapon for their opponents.
Click to expand...

Answers this:

Not to the point where you can't make complete sentences.

The man's been on the national stage for ages. There's no excuse for the way he just throws words around like this.
Click to expand...

Explain.
 
Segnosaur said:
“It’s amazing, I can’t even believe it. I’ve been so lucky in terms of that whole world, it is a dangerous world out there. It’s like Vietnam, sort of. It is my personal Vietnam. I feel like a great and very brave solider,” Trump said in the interview when Howard Stern asked how he handled making sure he wasn’t contracting STDs from the women he was sleeping with. The business-mogul-turned-politician elaborated on the fact in the interview, calling women’s vaginas “potential landmines” and saying “there’s some real danger there.”
Click to expand...

Well, he hasn't become _less_ coherent, at least.
 
Argumemnon said:
Explain.
Click to expand...
What's to explain? Clarity of speech is a desirable trait except in politics where the opposite is the case.

There is no question that Trump didn't talk very well in the interview but his problem was making his views on CNN and MSNBC known too clearly.
 
psionl0 said:
What's to explain? Clarity of speech is a desirable trait except in politics where the opposite is the case.
Click to expand...

Yeah but this isn't your standard political speech, where you remain rather vague or maintain plausible deniability. We're talking about a man who just cannot speak for lengths of time in a way that is coherent unless he has a teleprompter.

Say what you will about Obama but he never had that problem. Trump sounds more like Palin.
 
Argumemnon said:
Yeah but this isn't your standard political speech, where you remain rather vague or maintain plausible deniability. We're talking about a man who just cannot speak for lengths of time in a way that is coherent unless he has a teleprompter.

Say what you will about Obama but he never had that problem. Trump sounds more like Palin.
Click to expand...
I have already discussed poor political speakers above. Sometimes it is a liability and sometimes it has no effect on their ability to get things done. In a few cases (though definitely not in Trump's case) a quirky manner of speaking can even endear a politician to the voters.

At the end of the day, it is what happens when the mike is switched off that matters most.
 
psionl0 said:
I have already discussed poor political speakers above. Sometimes it is a liability and sometimes it has no effect on their ability to get things done. In a few cases (though definitely not in Trump's case) a quirky manner of speaking can even endear a politician to the voters.

At the end of the day, it is what happens when the mike is switched off that matters most.
Click to expand...

I am reminded of the old SNL Reagan Mastermind skit, for some reason.
 
psionl0 said:
I have already discussed poor political speakers above. Sometimes it is a liability and sometimes it has no effect on their ability to get things done. In a few cases (though definitely not in Trump's case) a quirky manner of speaking can even endear a politician to the voters.

At the end of the day, it is what happens when the mike is switched off that matters most.
Click to expand...

...so you in fact agree that he's a poor speaker. The only thing you disagree with then is the implication that it makes him insane, which is not a claim I've made.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom