by SilkthreadTK is not just antisocial- she is also schizoid. Am I right about that, Demon? Do you know anything about Schizoid Personality Disorder?
No, not clinically. My reading and interests have all been along the lines of Freud, Jung, Ernest Jones, Karen Horney: Not clinical or DSM types, but classical theorists, or existentialists such as Rilke and Kierkegaard. So I am taking that sort of approach to ThrillKill.
by TurncoatYou call them classical theorists, I call them outdated.
A lot of their findings are indestinguishable from faith I'd argue, even moreso than current findings.
I understand that most people think as you do; that they are simply outmoded and no longer relevant. Of course I belong to the camp of people who feel they are more needed than ever.
But I can surely understand why you would think this way. The era of brain science and brain imaging , though, does not have the last word, and has already suffered some blows (research is now questioning if brain imaging actually does catch the brain in action, or explain anything). But as stated most people would agree with you.
by SilkthreadTK is not just antisocial- she is also schizoid. Am I right about that, Demon? Do you know anything about Schizoid Personality Disorder?
What reading/research I just conducted online, simply seems to be speaking of apathy, blunted affect, social isolation, emotional coldness, solitary life: Sounds like an alientated human being. Considering ThrillKill's childhood, how the hell else was she supposed to wind up? Why does the clinical camp have the last word?
@Turncoat: See where I am coming from? Why do you believe current clinicians have the last word?
1. Depends on how you define "worse"
2. Not something I'd admit to on an open web forum
3. Good and bad like every other child.
4. I don't remember much about my childhood...
5. fertalizing stuff...
6. to have a story worth telling.
7. rock climb, kayak, hike, camp, offroad, read, write, hit the clubs, manipulate people for sport, gym, chess, that's about all lately...
8. Federal Employee
9. I'd come back as me with all the knowledge I've gained from this life.
10. evil only exists in your mind... it's the little red devil that tells you to violate the lives of others.
I mean there is a reason why Freud is scoffed at in the field, for the easiest example among the names you dropped (I find Jung sillier).
I don't deny they'd have worthy input that'd make sense if they were to somehow come back to life and see this new world in front of them, but other people learning the theories as more than the building blocks of science's history, while ignoring new findings? When the older findings had a context radically different to now, didn't have too many other theories to counter it, and had many formerly unfalsifiable backings that actually have counterarguements now? I think those who attach too strongly to past theories risk not leaving room in their own minds for progress toward accuracy we haven't yet touched upon. The old has value, but the new paves the way for more, and the old banked on many shortcuts of faith. It's easy enough to say findings of now do too (I'd argue to a lesser extent), but in the future, I'm sure said theories will look rediculous in their own light after we've found even more.
The best theories (or more interesting at least) come from no exposure to the field (outside the box ideas) meeting someone who's looked into every finding from then to now. The creativity would dare to see something formerly unseen, while the prior knowledge could be used to solidify it and make sense of it.
"@Turncoat: See where I am coming from? Why do you believe current clinicians have the last word?"
They don't, they make all sorts of mistakes, and there are a lot of bullshit theories. Believe me, my history has shown many clinicians with wrong answers, but science keeps evolving, keeps growing, and eventually will pave the way toward stronger accuracy. More and more things are being found with time, even the cure for my own crazy (not meds!) is a relatively recent finding.
We just aren't quite there now, but we are closer than before's views that borderlined philosophy instead of scientific pursuits. If we stuck purely to the four names you brought up, I'd still be a total nutbar, instead of the reformed charmer I am today. 
1. Whats the worst thing you've ever done?
Nothing, really. I think I'm a very nice gal...Well, I've made some mistakes in the past that brought me a lot of consequences, but it's all over now.
2. Have you ever committed a serious crime that either did or could have sent you to prison? If yes, what crime did you do?
No, never.
3. Did you have a happy childhood?
I had a lot of good moments, but, at the same time, I had terrible ones. However, I'm thankful for the last ones and I'm glad things were that way.
4. What is your earliest childhood memory?
Once, someone put a snail on my shoulder and it left a green substance on my shirt.
5. What do you think you'll be doing in 20 years from now?
I don't know...lol, I really don't care either. Let's see where life takes me. I like surprises.
6. Do you believe you have a purpose in life?
Yes. It's all about survival, competition and self-improvement.
7. What do you do in your spare time?
I work out a lot and sleep.
8. Are you working? If yes, what do you do for a living?
No. I'm in college.
9. If there was a magic spell you could use only once after you die the
first time, that gave you the power to return to life as anything you
want to be, what would you choose to be?
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_BVbcNcXrio4/R0iHE-QXXeI/AAAAAAAAAFg/s72ceVT_0xI/s1600/plague.jpg
10. If you could visualize evil, how would you describe it?
I don't think I can imagine an abstraction becoming something concrete...to me, evilness is just an absurd concept, as well as some other abstractions. They make no sense at all.
