Sociopath Community

The boundary between pathology and normal quirk isn't always well defined, but it's usually helpful for clinicians to categorize by profoundness of impact on functioning. Many people exhibit a degree of many quirks, including echolalia and misophonia (among many, many others). None of them mean anything in the absence of functional impairment. 

Why are you interested in cataloguing your "glitches"? We all have them. Do you think you have some undiagnosed disorder?

Outro said: 

The boundary between pathology and normal quirk isn't always well defined, but it's usually helpful for clinicians to categorize by profoundness of impact on functioning. Many people exhibit a degree of many quirks, including echolalia and misophonia (among many, many others). None of them mean anything in the absence of functional impairment. 

They don't impede on my life.

Why are you interested in cataloguing your "glitches"? We all have them. Do you think you have some undiagnosed disorder?

I don't think they correlate into a disorder of any kind. It's just out of curiosity, why shouldn't I think about these? 

Edit: They might indicate a disorder, but not to a pathological extent. 

Xadem said: 

Outro said: 

The boundary between pathology and normal quirk isn't always well defined, but it's usually helpful for clinicians to categorize by profoundness of impact on functioning. Many people exhibit a degree of many quirks, including echolalia and misophonia (among many, many others). None of them mean anything in the absence of functional impairment. 

They don't impede on my life.

Why are you interested in cataloguing your "glitches"? We all have them. Do you think you have some undiagnosed disorder?

I don't think they correlate into a disorder of any kind. It's just out of curiosity, why shouldn't I think about these? 

Edit: They might indicate a disorder, but not to a pathological extent. 

There's no reason you shouldn't think about them, but you probably have little to gain from using clinical terms to understand facets of your personality.

From the little I've seen, you've got enough personality to forgo stuffy clinical terms entirely. They aren't particularly helpful or descriptive beyond being part of a diagnostic toolkit.

Outro said: 

Xadem said: 

Outro said: 

The boundary between pathology and normal quirk isn't always well defined, but it's usually helpful for clinicians to categorize by profoundness of impact on functioning. Many people exhibit a degree of many quirks, including echolalia and misophonia (among many, many others). None of them mean anything in the absence of functional impairment. 

They don't impede on my life.

Why are you interested in cataloguing your "glitches"? We all have them. Do you think you have some undiagnosed disorder?

I don't think they correlate into a disorder of any kind. It's just out of curiosity, why shouldn't I think about these? 

Edit: They might indicate a disorder, but not to a pathological extent. 

There's no reason you shouldn't think about them, but you probably have little to gain from using clinical terms to understand facets of your personality.

But what risk am I running by doing this? 

From the little I've seen, you've got enough personality to forgo stuffy clinical terms entirely. They aren't particularly helpful or descriptive beyond being part of a diagnostic toolkit.

I still don't see a reason to not do this apart from your assumption that it'd come from a place similar to the one that makes people on SC adopt DSM labels. 

Xadem said: 

Outro said: 

Xadem said: 

Outro said: 

The boundary between pathology and normal quirk isn't always well defined, but it's usually helpful for clinicians to categorize by profoundness of impact on functioning. Many people exhibit a degree of many quirks, including echolalia and misophonia (among many, many others). None of them mean anything in the absence of functional impairment. 

They don't impede on my life.

Why are you interested in cataloguing your "glitches"? We all have them. Do you think you have some undiagnosed disorder?

I don't think they correlate into a disorder of any kind. It's just out of curiosity, why shouldn't I think about these? 

Edit: They might indicate a disorder, but not to a pathological extent. 

There's no reason you shouldn't think about them, but you probably have little to gain from using clinical terms to understand facets of your personality.

But what risk am I running by doing this? 

No dramatic risk. Is "risk" the litmus test?

From the little I've seen, you've got enough personality to forgo stuffy clinical terms entirely. They aren't particularly helpful or descriptive beyond being part of a diagnostic toolkit.

I still don't see a reason to not do this apart from your assumption that it'd come from a place similar to the one that makes people on SC adopt DSM labels. 

A superficial, pointless place? I'm not assuming, but I would wager. 

What's lost by describing a personality without deferring to boring clinical terms?

Outro said: 

Xadem said: 

Outro said: 

Xadem said: 

Outro said: 

The boundary between pathology and normal quirk isn't always well defined, but it's usually helpful for clinicians to categorize by profoundness of impact on functioning. Many people exhibit a degree of many quirks, including echolalia and misophonia (among many, many others). None of them mean anything in the absence of functional impairment. 

They don't impede on my life.

Why are you interested in cataloguing your "glitches"? We all have them. Do you think you have some undiagnosed disorder?

I don't think they correlate into a disorder of any kind. It's just out of curiosity, why shouldn't I think about these? 

Edit: They might indicate a disorder, but not to a pathological extent. 

There's no reason you shouldn't think about them, but you probably have little to gain from using clinical terms to understand facets of your personality.

But what risk am I running by doing this? 

No dramatic risk. Is "risk" the litmus test?

But some risk? 

From the little I've seen, you've got enough personality to forgo stuffy clinical terms entirely. They aren't particularly helpful or descriptive beyond being part of a diagnostic toolkit.

I still don't see a reason to not do this apart from your assumption that it'd come from a place similar to the one that makes people on SC adopt DSM labels. 

A superficial, pointless place? I'm not assuming, but I would wager. 

Is that why you think people cling onto labels like NPD and ASPD? 

And I am doing the same thing here?  

What's lost by describing a personality without deferring to boring clinical terms?

These terms exist for a reason other than people's self indulgence and ego stroking. 

Xadem said: 

Outro said: 

Xadem said: 

Outro said: 

Xadem said: 

Outro said: 

The boundary between pathology and normal quirk isn't always well defined, but it's usually helpful for clinicians to categorize by profoundness of impact on functioning. Many people exhibit a degree of many quirks, including echolalia and misophonia (among many, many others). None of them mean anything in the absence of functional impairment. 

They don't impede on my life.

Why are you interested in cataloguing your "glitches"? We all have them. Do you think you have some undiagnosed disorder?

I don't think they correlate into a disorder of any kind. It's just out of curiosity, why shouldn't I think about these? 

Edit: They might indicate a disorder, but not to a pathological extent. 

There's no reason you shouldn't think about them, but you probably have little to gain from using clinical terms to understand facets of your personality.

But what risk am I running by doing this? 

No dramatic risk. Is "risk" the litmus test?

But some risk? 

The risk of wasting your own time, I guess.

From the little I've seen, you've got enough personality to forgo stuffy clinical terms entirely. They aren't particularly helpful or descriptive beyond being part of a diagnostic toolkit.

I still don't see a reason to not do this apart from your assumption that it'd come from a place similar to the one that makes people on SC adopt DSM labels. 

A superficial, pointless place? I'm not assuming, but I would wager. 

Is that why you think people cling onto labels like NPD and ASPD? 

And I am doing the same thing here?  

You'd have to appraise that risk yourself. Unless risk doesn't matter. In which case party on.

What's lost by describing a personality without deferring to boring clinical terms?

These terms exist for a reason other than people's self indulgence and ego stroking. 

No they don't. Neuropsychiatric conditions just borrow these terms from pop culture and self-analysis.  

I don't have any of those but some times I wish I could afford absolute silence.

Sounds a bit ocd maybe.