<My gut feeling is that if you describe MMY's behavior in detail to a
number of psychologist and psychiatrists, they will guess that he had
a personality disorder.>
So you don't think they would just join him in his self perception as
being the most important human being in history? What if they heard
Bevan telling them that he really really was, many many many many many
many many times? How about then? Still no? This is going to be
harder than I thought...
This is the most troubling aspect of the cute little holy man picture
of Maharishi, his extreme version of grandiosity. And it is also
where the devotion of his followers cross over into a darker place of
enabling a person with a real psychological problem. A person who
might have needed help instead of a steady stream of ass kissing.
Unless of course you want to give his own self perception another
shot? You know, the perspective where EVERY other meditation teacher
and spiritual leader was his inferior. Where he was uniqually saddled
with the responsibility to spiritually regenerate all of mankind
alone, and only he among ALL the spiritual representatives of the
Vedic tradition in India knew the SPECIAL SECRETS.
The ONLY authentic spiritual teacher, or at least the best of them
ALL. The TOPPERMOST of the POPPERMOST, a wonder unto himself AMEN and
Hallelujah! Words cannot express how great and important he was, yet
his minions try...
And people wonder why I need the DSM-IV? It is to keep me somewhat
sympathetic to his condition instead of ... being less sympathetic,
let's just leave it at.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity"
> > ruthsimplicity@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Judy, you made the comment:
> > >
> > > "The DSM diagnoses, remember, are for the guidance
> > > of therapists who are working with patients who
> > > can't cope, based on the characteristics found in
> > > thousands of past patients who couldn't cope."
> > >
> > > which may be generally true, I don't know, I am not a shrink.
> >
> > As I recall, this is explained in the intro
> > sections of DSM. ("Can't cope" is my phrase;
> > change to "seek treatment" if that seems more
> > appropriately neutral).
> >
> > > However, people with certain personality disorders may cope
> > > just fine,a narcissist or sociopath for example.
> >
> > Technically, these are only disorders if they're
> > professionally diagnosed, and typically people
> > aren't diagnosed unless they seek treatment (or
> > perhaps commit a crime and are required to submit
> > to psychiatric examination).
> >
> > So to some extent it's a matter of semantics, but
> > I think the caveat bears consideration.
> >
>
>
> When I think about this more, and certainly Peter would know more than
> we do about this, but the DSM IV categories are likely based on a
> combination of historical categories, clinical experience, and research.
>
> Certainly the diagnosis of amateurs or even professionals based on just
> what they read or hear about a person is risky and vulnerable to
> attack. But then again, I have seen patients who are diagnosed
> inconsistently by professionals who met with them personally. For
> example, a young person might be diagnosed with PTSD or borderline
> personality disorder by different people.
>
> Nevertheless, even if a person never meets with a professional or if
> professionals disagree as to a diagnosis, it doesn't mean that there
> isn't something amiss. I wouldn't be surprised if most people with
> narcissistic PD don't go for treatment, but that their families end up
> looking for help in dealing with the person.
>
> My gut feeling is that if you describe MMY's behavior in detail to a
> number of psychologist and psychiatrists, they will guess that he had a
> personality disorder.
>
