Can INTP/INTJs potentially be Schizoid?

[Adaire]

"SPD is relatively rare compared with other personality disorders, being estimated at less than 1% of the general population. It is believed by some to correlate with the INTJ and INTP personality types in the Myers-Briggs type indicator." Quoted from:

http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/Sc/Schizoid+Personality+Disorder.html

If you are unfamiliar with the term Schizoid here is the wiki entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoid_personality_disorder

I've read this generalization before in several websites. Some of the typical schizoid characteristics struck a little close to home. Mainly the description of the rich, imaginative, inner life and the person willingly being cut off from people and reality. Some of you probably already know about this disorder(lots of people study psychology here, must be an INTP thing), but I am curious how you all feel about it. Do you regard it as an actual disorder or just a label from people who can't accept such differences? Of course their will always be extremes; but is this an inherently wrong way to live? Any feedback and thoughts are welcome! Also for those who don't know; Schizoid and Schizophrenia are completely different.

I just joined this forum and this is my second post; I look forward to meeting you all. :)

[echoplex]

Welcome.

The link you posted didn't work for me, so I'll post this one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoid

"...characterized by a lack of interest in social relationships, a tendency towards a solitary lifestyle, secretiveness, and emotional coldness."

I think all four of those could apply to the INTP personality.

However, upon skimming through the article, I'd say more elaboration is needed to determine this. For instance, the DSM-IV-TR criteria seemed to be a bit more strict and would seem to require more than just an INTP personality to warrant a diagnosis.


neither desires nor enjoys close relationships, including being part of a family
almost always chooses solitary activities
has little, if any, interest in having sexual experiences with another person
takes pleasure in few, if any, activities
lacks close friends or confidants other than first-degree relatives
appears indifferent to the praise or criticism of others
shows emotional coldness, detachment, or flattened affectivityFour are required to qualify as Schizoid. I'd say only two (2 & 5) are true for me.

I'd guess that INTPs and INTJs would be represented as Schizoid more than most types though.

[Adaire]

sorry my bad. fixed link:

http://www.ptypes.com/schizoid.html

and I'd agree with you there. It's basically INTx taken to the very extreme.

[FacetiousPersona]

I (concentration on internal world and lack of interest in the external world)
N (focus on fantasies within the internal world)
T (lack of emotions and egocentric interest in themselves through independence)
P, but possibly J (openness to these experiences and allowing the possibilities to consume)

[XIII]

Schizoid and Schizophrenia are completely different.
I thought that schizoid ''disorders'' were often seen as less developed forms of Schizophrenia (i.e. Not a type of schizophrenia, but on the same spectrum)?
Some psychologists do not recognise schizoid personality ''disorder''; Nietzsche, for example, could have been diagnosed with it before his psychotic break, yet few have achieved sanity such as his. Perhaps some of its traits are necessary prices to pay for the elevated/enhanced perception which tends to accompany them, in the same way that stupidity is often the price for mental ''order''?

This is just uneducated speculation. I intend to study psychology, but have barely read about it yet. I also score 90+% schizoid on those online personality disorder tests, so I may be a little biased :rolleyes: . One of my major concerns in life is avoiding psychiatric consultation. Imagine what they would make of my personality change experiments... I doubt I would be sectioned, but having to declare a 'disorder' on applications would be a terrible hassle.

[FacetiousPersona]

I thought that schizoid ''disorders'' were often seen as less developed forms of Schizophrenia (i.e. Not a type of schizophrenia, but on the same spectrum)?
Some psychologists do not recognise schizoid personality ''disorder''; Nietzsche, for example, could have been diagnosed with it before his psychotic break- few have achieved sanity such as his. Perhaps some of its traits are necessary prices to pay for the elevated/enhanced perception which tends to accompany them, in the same way that stupidity tends to accompany mental ''order''?

This is just uneducated speculation. I intend to study psychology, but have barely read about it yet. I also score 90+% on those online personality disorder tests, so I may be a little biased :rolleyes:
Schizoid personality disorder is linked to the negative symptoms of schizophrenia, which are typically the schizophrenic symptoms that affect their emotions (blunt effect, poor motivation, lack of action, etc). It is also known for schizoid patients to have psychotic breakdowns in their life at times.

[Adaire]

I think they are more of a 'family' of personality disorders. Someone doesn't deteriorate from schizoid to schizophrenic. They are either one or the other. Though someone with a schizophrenic grandparent or parent is more likely to be schizoid. The symptoms of schizophrenia, schizotypal, and schizoid are also vastly different.

"Based on family inheritance and genetic studies, Schizophrenia, Schizotypal Personality Disorder and Schizoid PD are considered to be part of a "schizophrenic spectrum" of mental illness. Although Schizophrenia is categorized as a Psychotic Disorder and both Schizoid and Schyzotypal are Personality Disorders, all three share several symptoms, including avoidance of social relations and flat emotional affect. An important distinction is that people with Schizoid Personality don't typically experience the perceptual distortions, paranoia or illusions typical of Schizotypal Personality or the psychotic episodes of Schizophrenia"

On another note most schizoids go undiagnosed as they are able to function in society and don't feel that their is anything particularly wrong with them. Pretty much the only instances when they seek help is when they become extremely lonely, depressed or suicidal. I guess my point is that Schizoids can lead independent normal lives; whereas a schizophrenic simply cannot. I've known both schizophrenic and schizoid people and the presence of mind and capability isn't even comparable.

[Artifice Orisit]

Being insane doesn’t mean the mind is "broken" like some clockwork toy, it just means the persons mind is ill adapted to function in current society. This can be the result of physical influences such as genetics or disease; it can also be due to other influences such as psychological trauma.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the attributes that define us as INTX would result in the diagnosis of being schizoid if we were unable to function in normal society.

We're not schizoid by our MBIT functions. We're functional schizoids.

[Adaire]

hmmm I like that 'functional schizoid,' sounds like a band name.

[FacetiousPersona]

A diagnosis is normally only warranted when the condition/disorder is affecting the person's life these days, I think.

[Artifice Orisit]

Humans as a species are fundamentally insane.
Stephan King.
Well, one of his characters anyway.

[FacetiousPersona]

"Humans as a species are fundamentally insane."
Stephan King.
Well, one of his characters anyway.

This bothers me. If it is our base, surely it is 'normal' for humans instead of 'insane'? Insane denotes that we are 'malfunctioning' fundamentally, which is flawed to state when it is how we naturally are. Do we have humans functioning 'normally' fundamentally to compare ourselves to? We are functioning correctly according to our design. Perhaps it is criticizing our nature after comparing us to other creatures and elements of the environment?

How is he defining this 'insanity'? Is it against what is 'right' or 'acceptable'? Do we evolve through development as individuals and achieve a superior state beyond this 'insanity'? If it is fundamental, do we remain as it, for it is our human essence? Can we detach ourselves from a characteristic which is embedded in our foundation?

It is difficult to compare us to other species, for we are the only sentient species known on this planet and we are very complex. We seem to rely on the 'norm' and 'appropriate' to define external insanity in our current society. How are we being deemed as fundamentally insane when there is no similar species with non-insane functioning to compare us to? Is it merely indicating that we are simply prone to insanity innately and anyone could succumb to a mental illness? Is he implying each human is born with a condition which could be classified as a 'mental condition' in the right setting/environment?

I disagree with my thoughts expressed in this post, and I only did this to explore an idea to develop alternate thoughts for my mind to have.

[Artifice Orisit]

Nice rebuttal,

I think he was relating mans inhumanity to man, whilst holding values against such inhumanity; that our cognitive functions are inconsistent and often flawed, that we are all insane, in some way.
That nobody can claim to be entirely sane.

[XIII]

A diagnosis is normally only warranted when the condition/disorder is affecting the person's life these days, I think.

Think about this some more...

[FacetiousPersona]

Think about this some more...

I added 'normally' for a reason, and I'm not interested in thinking about this (too lazy as well). I was referring to the psychiatrists I've met. One explained he is rather hesitant to diagnose and only decides to when the person's symptoms are intervening with the stability of their life.

I am not denying there are cases with patients being diagnosed for simply having the symptoms or after they demand to be diagnosed with a condition. My statement was an intentional generalization with uncertainty, hence the added 'I think'. My reason for adding it was for people to have another possibility to consider. Others are free to correct it or develop it.

[XIII]

affecting the person's life

How could even the slightest irregularity (or even regularity... or even anything) not affect a person's life? That's illogical.

[FacetiousPersona]

affecting the person's life

How could even the slightest irregularity (or even regularity... or even anything) not affect a person's life? That's illogical.

If you want to read the word very concretely, sure, but I did not expect anyone to be this literal. I'll attempt to be more straightforward with my wording in the future for your mind's benefit.

[XIII]

If you want to read the word very concretely, sure, but I did not expect anyone to be this literal. I'll attempt to be more straightforward with my wording in the future for your mind's benefit.

Should I just get down and worship your superior intellect now? Your post is very clever. Well done. Good job. Way to go. You show 'em girl. Give it all you got.

''1+1=3''
''That's illogical''
''I didn't expect people to actually react to what I said, I thought they would react to what I meant but didn't express [insert masturbatory comment about superiority to listener, who is just too dumb to psychically infer unspoken words which completely alter the meaning of the assertion] ''

[FacetiousPersona]

Should I just get down and worship your superior intellect now? Your post is very clever. Well done. Good job. Way to go. You show 'em girl. Give it all you got.

''1+1=3''
''That's illogical''
''I didn't expect people to actually react to what I said, I thought they would react to what I meant but didn't express [insert masturbatory comment about superiority to listener, who is just too dumb to psychically infer unspoken words which completely alter the meaning of the assertion] ''

The statement was:

"A diagnosis is normally only warranted when the condition/disorder is affecting the person's life these days, I think."

I accidentally did not add 'negatively', but I clarified the meaning in a later post after your comment regarding its ambiguity. You seemed to have entirely disregarded my elaboration and continued your fixation on this error. Why was this required when the misunderstanding had apparently been resolved? Did you want to prolong the criticism of an accidental flaw for other people to possibly notice and praise you? Are you aiming to gain others' approval? You were extending the discussion when it was unnecessary.

Considering the nature of language, I would expect it to be possible for you to infer the correct context via a process of deduction. I like to think of language as flexible and open to manipulation, but we have to, of course, respect certain established rules to maintain coherence in our communication. Did I maintain this coherence? Personally, I think that I did, but this is a matter of opinion. After reading my initial post, I concluded it is possible to ascertain the intended meaning of the sentence. However, I think you would prefer to indicate a potential flaw within the sentence instead of comprehending the message trying to be conveyed through it.

Now, let uss use 'affect' in another context. "The pills are affecting his health." People would generally presume it is implying the male's health is declining as a result of the pill usage, not the opposite. If the person was interested in clearly expressing the opposite, they would decide to use 'effect'. This usage would be: "The pills seem to have an effect on his health." 'Affect' has closer negative connotations, in my opinion, to a negative quality/state.

We could both discuss semantics, but I would prefer to continue this thread's discussion regarding SPD (Schizoid Personality Disorder). We have both expressed our opinions now, I think, and we should focus on the true topic of this thread.

[XIII]

I was reacting to the condescending nature of your post: ''for your mind's benefit''. Honestly, what did you expect after writing something like that? I was more annoyed with the personal, irrelevant nature of your post than trying to elicit any particular reaction (i.e approval) from others.
Anyway, no hard feelings. I have much I could say to your above post, but, as per request, I won't. I usually enjoy your posts- let's forget about this and get on with talking about interesting things ;)

[FacetiousPersona]

I was reacting to the condescending nature of your post: ''for your mind's benefit''. Honestly, what did you expect after writing something like that? I was more annoyed with the personal, irrelevant nature of your post than trying to elicit any particular reaction (i.e approval) from others.
Anyway, no hard feelings. I usually enjoy your posts- let's forget about this and get on with talking about interesting things ;)

Thank you.

I was wondering about which cognitive processes would be stereotypical of an individual with Schizoid Personality Disorder. Would they have Ti to organize their internal world logically and Ne to connect concepts together within it to form an elaborate, coherent fantasy world?

[Ermine]

Referring to the list of symptoms for Schizoid at the beginning of the thread, I can easliy identify with 4 of them. However, I'm confident that I'm not a schizoid as my life isn't debilitated by my "disorder". At what point is a personality disorder merely an odd personality?

[Artifice Orisit]

@-XIII
That was a masterful job of annoying Face, *applauds*
By your nit-picking prowess, can I assume your an INTJ?

At what point is a personality disorder merely an odd personality? I'm not sure a concrete distinction can be made, other than perhaps by the judgement of a qualified psychoanalyst.

[Weliddryn]

"SPD is relatively rare compared with other personality disorders, being estimated at less than 1% of the general population. It is believed by some to correlate with the INTJ and INTP personality types in the Myers-Briggs type indicator." Quoted from:

http://http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/Sc/Schizoid+Personality+Disorder.html (http://http//www.websters-online-dictionary.org/Sc/Schizoid+Personality+Disorder.html)

If you are unfamiliar with the term Schizoid here is the wiki entry:

http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoid_personality_disorder (http://http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoid_personality_disorder)

I've read this generalization before in several websites. Some of the typical schizoid characteristics struck a little close to home. Mainly the description of the rich, imaginative, inner life and the person willingly being cut off from people and reality. Some of you probably already know about this disorder(lots of people study psychology here, must be an INTP thing), but I am curious how you all feel about it. Do you regard it as an actual disorder or just a label from people who can't accept such differences? Of course their will always be extremes; but is this an inherently wrong way to live? Any feedback and thoughts are welcome! Also for those who don't know; Schizoid and Schizophrenia are completely different.

I just joined this forum and this is my second post; I look forward to meeting you all. :)

Society comes up with classifications of many things, it is a way of organizing things and differentiating aspects of their world. It is only natural that a group of people, different from the norm with similarities would be classified by a term linking them together in the minds of most of society.

Schizoid is normally referred to with a derogatory aura, a sense of foreboding, maybe, and in the depth's of a person's mind when examining the title "Schizoid" they may hear a small voice stating that it is wrong to be that way. This is due to the fact that society would fair rather poorly if such people with those characteristics would become dominate society would, perhaps, collapse. INTPs live in their own world, as does the Schizoid, paying little heed to the world outside their own minds, not in a practical sense, anyway. It would be unhealthy for society to allow such people to dominate their world, so a negative connotation would of course be associated with the term "Schizoid."

Is it a wrong way to live? This goes back to morals, I pressume, and in which case that is subjective to the individual. One could say that if nature has created such people, it must not be wrong, yet, on the other side of that blade, if it would be particularly difficult for such a person to live with the same ease as others of their race, thus would die off easier, it could be seen as wrong, a mistake of nature who made some traits too strong in a person and some too weak. Perhaps the only way to answer that question would be to see how well the person fairs in the game of survival, but at the same time... Our society has advanced, significantly beyond the species that we inhabit the earth with. Our society has proven its capacity in dealing with INTPs and Schiziods (the two terms are not interchangeable, but the similarities between the two justify my linking of the two. The difference would, of course, lie in the intensity of the traits and defficiency in other areas.) so perhaps they are a byproduct of societies advancement and, if nurtured correctly or, given time to evolve further, become beneficiary to society in ways that the normal person can not. Thus, the implication of their sustenance in the game of survival, perhaps, being of a disadvantage, would not apply to whether it is "wrong" to be the way that they are. Our society is advanced in such a way that survival, though still the underlying force which drives our race, is not the only goal of humanity, so long as our success can be sustained. We can now indulge in things that could not be reached before, and such people as Schizoids can now be tolerated as part of that indulgence. (Note the word "can" and keep in mind that it is not "are").

They would be less tolerated in a primitive society, perhaps, and seen as being "messed up" but as society progresses, the gifts that these individuals possess will be more prominent to society.

[XIII]

@-XIII
That was a masterful job of annoying Face, *applauds*
By your nit-picking prowess, can I assume your an INTJ?

I'm not sure a concrete distinction can be made, other than perhaps by the judgement of a qualified psychoanalyst.


My Ni, Ti, and Ne are all strongly developed, and (despite hours of reading) I've been unable to determine whether INTJ or INTP best describes me. Neither is supposed to use Ni as much as it uses Ti, which I seem to do. I consistently test as INTP.

As for disorder vs. odd personality. I'm surprised that any of you attribute validity to the classifications of state-backed institutions, or to the judgement of servants of those institutions. My justification? History.

Additionally, consider what would happen to somebody who achieved a beautiful or elevated form of perception which was incompatible with effective function in general society. Consider what would happen to somebody who wasn't able to numb themselves to the collective psychological pathology and semantic fascism which prevails and has, throughout human history, prevailed, and thus was driven to mental-breakdown or inability to function.
Mild insanity, neither excessively insane nor excessively sane, is the only psychophysiological state accepted by most state-backed instituitons. Unlike some tribal cultures and the ancient Orient, most modern societies have no tradition of Shamanism. In the past, ''schizophrenics'' and ''loners'' tended to become shamans who communed with ''spirits'' and ''Gods'' and brought their elevated understandings back to the laypeople of the tribe. Their odd perceptions were not rejected and feared, and thus they were not- to the tribe or the individual- pathological.
The tyranny of subjective false sanity is the most terrifying conceivable. An ugly, mildly insane psychophysiological state of existence is glorified and set as the standard of health against which other states are to be measured. Current normality is sickness; health is persecuted, either by the instruments of state or through ostracism by peers. There are 2 choices for those who wish to elevate or diversify their perception: either don't, and remain sick, or do, and be labeled sick.

-----------------------------------------------

It might be relevant that I intend to emulate all of the main personality ''disorders'', including schizoid ''disorder'', after my current personality experiment. Here's a list:

Disorder Info

The DSM-IV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-IV-TR) lists ten personality disorders, grouped into three clusters. The DSM also contains a category for behavioral patterns that do not match these ten disorders, but nevertheless exhibit characteristics of a personality disorder. This category is labeled Personality Disorder NOS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDNOS) (Not Otherwise Specified).

[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Personality_disorder&action=edit&section=4)] Cluster A (odd or eccentric disorders)
Paranoid personality disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoid_personality_disorder): characterized by irrational suspicions and mistrust of others
Schizoid personality disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoid_personality_disorder): lack of interest in social relationships, seeing no point in sharing time with others
Schizotypal personality disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizotypal_personality_disorder): also avoids social relationships, though out of a fear of people[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Personality_disorder&action=edit&section=5)] Cluster B (dramatic, emotional, or erratic disorders)
Antisocial personality disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder): "pervasive disregard for the law and the rights of others."
Borderline personality disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borderline_personality_disorder): extreme "black and white" thinking, instability in relationships, self-image, identity and behavior
Histrionic personality disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histrionic_personality_disorder): "pervasive attention-seeking behavior including inappropriate sexual seductiveness and shallow or exaggerated emotions"
Narcissistic personality disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder): "a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and a lack of empathy"[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Personality_disorder&action=edit&section=6)] Cluster C (anxious or fearful disorders)
Avoidant personality disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avoidant_personality_disorder): social inhibition, feelings of inadequacy, extreme sensitivity to negative evaluation and avoidance of social interaction
Dependent personality disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependent_personality_disorder): pervasive psychological dependence on other people.
Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive-compulsive_personality_disorder) (not the same as obsessive-compulsive disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive-compulsive_disorder)): characterized by rigid conformity to rules, moral codes, and excessive orderliness= The purpose of this is (generally) negative emulation: I familiarise myself with each disorder in order to identify, and then gain control over, the mental processes which underlay it. I'll probably temporarily ''become'' each type of disorder for a week.

[Gorgrim]

yes they can... some of the schizoid symptons have affects on me. They aren't neccesarily damaging, but it bothers me sometimes, when i look at certain other people

[Artifice Orisit]

@-XIII
Although I'm not sure if it's possible for you to emulate each "disorder" entirely, I still think this experiment is a great idea. Much like seeking out and coming to terms with aspects of one's own shadow, the act of emulating each disorder will likely broaden you perspective and fuel your cognitive development.
But be careful, it can be possible to harm one's self psychologically if the process is taken too far, too fast. Either by exposing yourself to an internal situation you're unprepared for, or worse losing sight of your own identity and being metaphorically consumed by what you are portraying.
Have you ever wondered why great actors are so prone to mental instability?

[cheese]

^From what I understand, XIII is unafraid of losing his "self".

[Oblivious]

Yes. If you lose it you can just make a new one. Based on hindsight, it will almost certainly be better.

[Adaire]

@XIII I've found all your posts(on this thread and on personality destruction) fascinating. Forgive me if you have already answered this; but what made you decide to pursue this experiment? Are you seeking truth, thrill, and/or mental freedom? Their is an inherent thrilling aspect to be able to actively change your personality in my opinion.

I also agree with tentatively with your above post. The perception of beauty is distorted by location, status, time period, ect. I have always felt sanity is the same way. I also define sanity differently. Not as the ability of a person to function or be successful in society; that would potentially make Paris Hilton, George Bush and Michael Jackson fully sane. Sanity is more the ability to perceive truth and the ability to distinguish what is and is not real. INTPs may spend a lot of time in their mind and in fantasy; but they don't confuse their inner world with the outer one. The intuitive nature of INTPs also helps us identify patterns and make predictions and thus understand reality fundamentally. I speak of course purely from my own experiences. I would argue that an experienced INTP is much more sane than the standard.

[XIII]

Thank you, Kaedri. It is exhilarating. Despite what I say below, the experiments are exciting enough on their own, regardless of the benefits which they may or may not result in. My primary motivation for doing them is and is not the experience itself.

My primary motivation is/isn't to become a better philosopher than Nietzsche. I read ''Thus Spoke Zarathustra'', thought it to be the most beautiful book ever written, and then decided that I wanted to... reach higher and lower into my soul than even Nietzsche had into his.

My primary motivation is/isn't to achieve psychological autonomy. I want to master myself and achieve as much of my potential as this lifetime permits.

My primary motivation is/isn't the transcendence of personality-bound perception. Look around at all of the fools who ''think this'' and ''think that'', without doing any thinking at all. Their conceptual schemes are calcified and stunted by their oh-so-precious yet oh-so-worthless ''personalities''. My experimentation frees my imagination from the shackles of the personal imperative.

My primary motivation is/isn't the deification of man. I want to overcome the tyranny of a single, mediocre humanity and participate in the birthing of Angels and Demons from the womb that is mankind.

My primary motivation is/isn't fascination and investigatory spirit. I initially experimented out of interest, and then heard of this version (Tarot) on an old occult tape. At first I though ''I'll do that one day'', but then I thought ''I want to know what living feels like, today''.

My primary motivation is/isn't to reach the boundaries of human perception and experience, and then to break through those boundaries. I want to access the most tenuous and divine perceptual systems available to man, and then to go further.

My primary motivation is/isn't art. I am an artist, but I do not want to limit my beauty to the external canvas. I seek to, when my psyche is strong enough, make every moment an act of art. My experimentation is really about teaching me how to paint life.

My primary motivation is/isn't getting *me* out of the way, so that ideas and perceptions can consume this human as they will.

A linguistic future self-portrait:
FORM/DESTRUCTION/CHAOS/CREATION/FORM/DESTRUCTION/CHAOS/CREATION/FORM/DESTRUCTION/CHAOS/CREATION/FORM

[Perseus]

In the Perseus Alternative System, the Schizotypal Personality Disorder (http://www.millon.net/taxonomy/schizotypal.htm)is called the Information Deficit Disorder.

The diagnosis is an overlay program over the personality type. INTPs may be prone to demonstrating the symptoms. However, Millon is a Wolfman (ENTJ) agenda, hence the mean spirited nature of the descriptions. The strange and peculiar are only referenced to Others and are therefore relative.

Under the Perseus system, the Wolfman tends to demonstrate the Conceited Personality Disorder (called the Incurables) which is closest but not exactly same as the Narcissistic Personality Disorder (http://www.millon.net/taxonomy/narcissistic.htm).

[Ogion]

I fixed the links in the first post, btw. (You had the "http://" two times)

Ogion

[sniktawekim]

"SPD is relatively rare compared with other personality disorders, being estimated at less than 1% of the general population. It is believed by some to correlate with the INTJ and INTP personality types in the Myers-Briggs type indicator." Quoted from:

http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/Sc/Schizoid+Personality+Disorder.html

If you are unfamiliar with the term Schizoid here is the wiki entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoid_personality_disorder

I've read this generalization before in several websites. Some of the typical schizoid characteristics struck a little close to home. Mainly the description of the rich, imaginative, inner life and the person willingly being cut off from people and reality. Some of you probably already know about this disorder(lots of people study psychology here, must be an INTP thing), but I am curious how you all feel about it. Do you regard it as an actual disorder or just a label from people who can't accept such differences? Of course their will always be extremes; but is this an inherently wrong way to live? Any feedback and thoughts are welcome! Also for those who don't know; Schizoid and Schizophrenia are completely different.

I just joined this forum and this is my second post; I look forward to meeting you all. :)


i recently have been really wondering if i am a schizoid or not.
the description almost fits me to a T, but im not sure.
and if so - what then?

[Tunesimah]

I got wind that a psychiatrist described me as having a schizoid personality. And it certainly fits, for the most part. On the wikipedia page, it talks about overt and covert descriptions of Schizoid and I think it describes me quite well.

Making human connections isn't really a strong point of mine, even though I don't have problems with people. And certainly I could spend tons of time by myself working on projects and learning without any inkling of 'needing' human interactions.

I talk with people but never really make that jump into friendship. I do have friends though, and they provide me with more than enough social interactions. I'm friends with them mostly through activities, there isn't too much 'emotional support' or however you want to call it.

As for emotions, I don't have many... and especially anger and hostility... that never comes to the surface. I do like to laugh though, and have my own sense of humor that's quite strong. But again my sense of humor is derived 'internally' from my own fantasy world, an external sense of comedy... you laugh because everyone else around you is laughing hardly ever gets a response from me.

As to it being a disorder, it's only a problem when I have to deal with the world. Especially in terms of finding a job and having a career... you have to impress people and certainly having emotional affect can help. When the world is telling you that networking is the best thing ever... and you have difficulties with it... it's not the most encouraging thought.

[Kuu]

Oooh nice necromancy, mike.

After being reading about it a lot, I do think there is a close relationship to the Schizoid personality disorder. Now that I think about it, it seems more likely than aspergers, which is also quite commonly brought to comparison with INTPness...

I also read that overt and covert thing and it fit me quite well...



Incidentally... I sometimes miss Face and Perseus. And XIII (in spite of it all). :cat:

[Tunesimah]

Now that I think about it, it seems more likely than aspergers, which is also quite commonly brought to comparison with INTPness...

I used to think I had Aspergers. But Schizoid fits better, and I don't have many of the same issues as they do. I'm just socially maladjusted through lack of experience and desire...

In situations where I'm forced to be social... I adapt and can do okay after a while... I think those with Aspergers have more issues in this regard.

[chloé]

Here's the difference I see between INTP personality and full-blown schizoid. As INTP's we're often uninterested in human relationships, emotionally "cold" or flat, have difficulty relating to others, and tend to prefer solitude. However, when we do need to be around people, we don't avoid it, if it's the most efficient route. Schizoids will go out of their way to avoid people even if it inconveniences their life or requires some sacrifice of end result. Schizoids are extremely bothered, stressed out, by interacting with others. We INTP's will probably choose interaction if it's the most efficient way to a desired result.

Example: You have to take the bus to work, and there are often people invading your space, being loud/stupid, etc. The INTP would be irritated but would put up with it since it's the fastest way to work. The schizoid might instead get up 3 hours earlier to walk to work, through rain, all to avoid human contact.

I used to think I might be schizoid, but the more I delved into it the more these differences stood out to me.

[sniktawekim]

Oooh nice necromancy, mike.

After being reading about it a lot, I do think there is a close relationship to the Schizoid personality disorder. Now that I think about it, it seems more likely than aspergers, which is also quite commonly brought to comparison with INTPness...

I also read that overt and covert thing and it fit me quite well...



Incidentally... I sometimes miss Face and Perseus. And XIII (in spite of it all). :cat:

what did they do to get banned?

[Adymus]

I would still consider it neurosis, an SPD is definitely not the same as just being an INTP. I would consider it an INTP with an extremely unbalanced Ti/Fe axis, with everything in Ti and almost nothing in Fe.

But I do see correlations in neurosis and personality types.

I once spoke to person who claimed to be Schizotypal online, and claimed to be an INTP, but I am certain he was actually an INFJ (that is, an INFJ who is really Ni heavy with little Fe, and almost no Ti or Se). After reading up on Schizotypal personality disorder, I can definitely see a correlation between it and extreme Ni dominance; the unusual worldviews, the disillusions of grandeur, the adversarial behavior, seeing connections in obscure places. This is all behavior that Ni doms already display, the difference is the healthy ones keep it under control and can actually reality check it with their other cognitive processes.

And then you have people like my Mother (ENFJ) who sees the world in extreme black and white, which I believe would be Borderline-personality disorder, but she was never diagnosed. I think a big part of this is her extreme Fe which is always super concerned over how the interpersonal dynamics are going. ie: if someone disagrees with her, she throws a fit, and instead of thinking that maybe it is because her worldview doesn't make any sense, she immediately assumes that it is because we are all out to destroy her credibility. This is essentially how she sees things: All that exists is truth and lies, there are no opinions. She holds the truth, and if you disagree with her, it is because you secretly know she is right, but you are too proud to admit it.

Maybe this kind of behavior can manifest with extreme Te too, but I'm fairly certain having really underdeveloped Ti is a huge part of it.

[sniktawekim]

I would still consider it neurosis, an SPD is definitely not the same as just being an INTP. I would consider it an INTP with an extremely unbalanced Ti/Fe axis, with everything in Ti and almost nothing in Fe.

But I do see correlations in neurosis and personality types.

I once spoke to person who claimed to be Schizotypal online, and claimed to be an INTP, but I am certain he was actually an INFJ (that is, an INFJ who is really Ni heavy with little Fe, and almost no Ti or Se). After reading up on Schizotypal personality disorder, I can definitely see a correlation between it and extreme Ni dominance; the unusual worldviews, the disillusions of grandeur, the adversarial behavior, seeing connections in obscure places. This is all behavior that Ni doms already display, the difference is the healthy ones keep it under control and can actually reality check it with their other cognitive processes.

And then you have people like my Mother (ENFJ) who sees the world in extreme black and white, which I believe would be Borderline-personality disorder, but she was never diagnosed. I think a big part of this is her extreme Fe which is always super concerned over how the interpersonal dynamics are going. ie: if someone disagrees with her, she throws a fit, and instead of thinking that maybe it is because her worldview doesn't make any sense, she immediately assumes that it is because we are all out to destroy her credibility. This is essentially how she sees things: All that exists is truth and lies, there are no opinions. She holds the truth, and if you disagree with her, it is because you secretly know she is right, but you are too proud to admit it.

Maybe this kind of behavior can manifest with extreme Te too, but I'm fairly certain having really underdeveloped Ti is a huge part of it.


schyzotypal!=schizoid!=schyzophrenia.

schizoids have feelings.. just not for other people.

[ckm]

Although I'm really interested in the contents of this topic, I really don't have anything to contribute, except: I identify much more with Avoidant Personality Disorder. However I can see why INTPs could be Schizoids.

[Adymus]

schyzotypal!=schizoid!=schyzophrenia.

schizoids have feelings.. just not for other people.
I never said they were the same, I only brought it up as another example of my understandings of Neurosis being caused by Extreme dominant functions.

[bluesquid]

If you are over 30, dont read further. Am speaking to the young INTP's

This world is full of alot of very stupid and or misguided people. you are for the most part alone in this world. Everyone else is content to live in some small world. You feel, and are different. You want to understand and manipulate the big world around you. Everyone else is happy with a dyson vacuum or a jacked up truck, having the same fucking conversations, over and over again.

Physiologically, you are the same as everyone else. Development of maturity is a process, just like everyone else. But your mind is different. I dare say better.

So you are full of hormones, fears, and lack of experience, just like all the others. yet you have an INTP reaction to all that not knowing. You over think it, and kinda freak out.

Experiences for less endowed people, are less of an experience. Follow me? Your not just "in the moment", your actively analyzing it, and freaking out. "There has to be more!" you say

I used to be really paranoid that people were laughing at me, I didnt get the joke. It made me a tad schizo at times. I would invent this entire world to try and understand why they were laughing. You know what it turned out to be? They laughed at everything. They weren't even aware of me.

so, just relax. If you get schizo? just chalk it up to not being able to figure it out. Its either too simple your not considering it, or too difficult. Either way? Learn something! Take all that energy and let it motivate you to improve yourself or your knowledge. And exercise, does a mind good.

If anyone can tell me the origin of this quote, you will get a prize.

"More than that. I diagnose." (someone) reflected. "You know, mental illness and psionic powers closely related, as in poltergeist effect. Many schizophrenics of paranoid variety are telepaths, picking up hate thoughts in subconscious of persons around them."

name omitted to make it harder

[sniktawekim]

"name omitted to make it harder"

.. did you forget that we are on the internet.. and one quick google search finds the answer?
oh well.

[Beat Mango]

i recently have been really wondering if i am a schizoid or not.
the description almost fits me to a T, but im not sure.
and if so - what then?

What then, indeed. That's the million dollar question for me: where to from here?

[sniktawekim]

heh.. well for me - i have already started.
i have to push the limit
see if i can break it.
can i love?
lets find out.

[Chimera]

If you are over 30, dont read further. Am speaking to the young INTP's


Speaking to the young INTP's? Are you implying that anyone over 30 years old has already figured these things out, and we haven't?

[Beat Mango]

heh.. well for me - i have already started.
i have to push the limit
see if i can break it.
can i love?
lets find out.

Yeah pushing the limits is fun for me too. I don't know where else I can go though, seeing as though I've already pushed a lot of the limits I want to push. There's always more extreme ways, I guess, but I am concerned that as I get older I'll need progressively more extreme ways to get my kicks, to the point where everyday things will lose their gloss. In fact, this has already started to happen :s

[bluesquid]

Speaking to the young INTP's? Are you implying that anyone over 30 years old has already figured these things out, and we haven't?

There is maturation, even in INTP's. people wouldnt believe it, but I was a child once. And I thought I knew everything then. Your right, some people over 30 might not have figured it all out.;)

[bluesquid]

"name omitted to make it harder"

.. did you forget that we are on the internet.. and one quick google search finds the answer?
oh well.

so whats the answer?

[sniktawekim]

so whats the answer?

its from minority report - of course..
so.. phillip K Dick?

[Chimera]

There is maturation, even in INTP's. people wouldnt believe it, but I was a child once. And I thought I knew everything then. Your right, some people over 30 might not have figured it all out.;)

And some people under 30 might have figured it out. :)
( Not all of it because I doubt that's even possible, it doesn't matter what age you are. )

[bluesquid]

its from minority report - of course..
so.. phillip K Dick?

right. lol

[bluesquid]

And some people under 30 might have figured it out. :)




( Not all of it because I doubt that's even possible, it doesn't matter what age you are. )



No way to know for sure. I think many people never mature, even after 60.

Love your name BTW. Makes me think of heterosis.

[bananaphallus]

But isn't maturity relative/subjective in some ways? Wouldn't calling someone immature be to presuppose that all those of said person's age are expected to behave in more or less the same way? e.g. 'He's far too bold to be a 26 year old', or, 'She doesn't seem quite as 'together', compared to most 50 y/o's'.

[sniktawekim]

But isn't maturity relative/subjective in some ways? Wouldn't calling someone immature be to presuppose that all those of said person's age are expected to behave in more or less the same way? e.g. 'He's far too bold to be a 26 year old', or, 'She doesn't seem quite as 'together', compared to most 50 y/o's'.


i very much agree with this.. and often find myself getting in large arguments with other people when they say somebody is immature.. i often say something like "he's not immature, that is a just a word you use to cover up that you dislike that he isnt exactly how you want him to be"

[chloé]

Maturity implies full development of the mind's potential, and therefore intellectual competance in a given scenario. There is such thing as immaturity ... it doesn't mean the person is unintelligent, it just means that the mind is still in the process of completely developing its ability to explore and cope with ideas. However, that doesn't by any means effect subjective understanding of concepts. And as far as I know, maturity in terms of intellect isn't scientifically measured, so no age group can claim that they have reached it.

[bluesquid]

Everything is relative. Of course it is.

I threw out the number 30. you are right. Its a generalization resulting directly from my lazzy ass.

Its a journey. Life is like a road. You never stop growing. blah blah blah.

You mature as you age. You may mature around or before, or after 30. You may never.

You may, in lacking experience and maturity, previous to acquiring said qualities, not know how to handle your abilities, relative to the general populace. You might feel a little schizo.

But I was extrapolating about all INTP's, based on my age when acquiring said qualities.

[Adymus]

If you are over 30, dont read further. Am speaking to the young INTP's

This world is full of alot of very stupid and or misguided people. you are for the most part alone in this world. Everyone else is content to live in some small world. You feel, and are different. You want to understand and manipulate the big world around you. Everyone else is happy with a dyson vacuum or a jacked up truck, having the same fucking conversations, over and over again.

Physiologically, you are the same as everyone else. Development of maturity is a process, just like everyone else. But your mind is different. I dare say better.

So you are full of hormones, fears, and lack of experience, just like all the others. yet you have an INTP reaction to all that not knowing. You over think it, and kinda freak out.

Experiences for less endowed people, are less of an experience. Follow me? Your not just "in the moment", your actively analyzing it, and freaking out. "There has to be more!" you say

I used to be really paranoid that people were laughing at me, I didnt get the joke. It made me a tad schizo at times. I would invent this entire world to try and understand why they were laughing. You know what it turned out to be? They laughed at everything. They weren't even aware of me.

so, just relax. If you get schizo? just chalk it up to not being able to figure it out. Its either too simple your not considering it, or too difficult. Either way? Learn something! Take all that energy and let it motivate you to improve yourself or your knowledge. And exercise, does a mind good.

If anyone can tell me the origin of this quote, you will get a prize.

"More than that. I diagnose." (someone) reflected. "You know, mental illness and psionic powers closely related, as in poltergeist effect. Many schizophrenics of paranoid variety are telepaths, picking up hate thoughts in subconscious of persons around them."

name omitted to make it harder
You are such a closet INFJ.

If this isn't bleeding with Ni dominant worldview and the eloquence of auxiliary Fe, then I don't know what is anymore...

[walfin]

Now, back to the topic at hand.

It seems an INTP might be perceived as schizoid even if they were schizotypal (or just normal INTP).

The INTP's lack of outward display of interest in many of the things on the list might very well be perceived as disinterest or dislike.

It would probably be easier to tell if an INTP is schizoid or not over the net, where we are better able to express ourselves.

[Moocow]

I'm a schizoid and I don't consider it a disorder. I'm always going to be a schizoid as long as I'm aware of both my own absolute personal freedom from all boundaries, yet aware that in order to continue functioning in any way I must constantly abide by boundaries set by myself or other people.... complicated further by the awareness that the struggles I put into following those boundaries are in the end pointless and void of meaning. Life is either to remain in a prison of meaningless, purposeless boundaries forever struggling against them, or simply die and hope for emptiness or some kind of change to replace it.

On one hand, I can't get very attached to people or things, but on the other hand, theres really nothing out there that can hurt me because of it. If I try to go on and be attached to something or someone it's not entirely possible for more than a short while, for as soon as that attachment starts to hurt me in any way, my awareness of freedom quickly surfaces.
Being a "normal" person is possible yet impossible because it comes with an immense sense of cognitive dissonance. Being the truth-seeker I am, I can not ignore what I've already found to be true.

I don't look at it as a disorder, just an awareness.

[bluesquid]

You are such a closet INFJ.

If this isn't bleeding with Ni dominant worldview and the eloquence of auxiliary Fe, then I don't know what is anymore...


Read my intro post, Im trying to do away with some of the tendencies that box us in. Im a INTP at heart, but Im quickly becoming a frankenstein. I have been studying people and the literature for quite awhile. i think a INTP is possibly the only type that can surely be a chameleon.

Im going to show you folks the promise land. An INTP that is fully functional in the real world, or at least the world the other types believe in, is a powerful thing. We as architects can design ourselves.

And it took me a ton of practice to develop eloquence. In the beginning, it was against my better judgement. But skills are skills.

[Adymus]

Read my intro post, Im trying to do away with some of the tendencies that box us in. Im a INTP at heart, but Im quickly becoming a frankenstein. I have been studying people and the literature for quite awhile. i think a INTP is possibly the only type that can surely be a chameleon.

Im going to show you folks the promise land. An INTP that is fully functional in the real world, or at least the world the other types believe in, is a powerful thing. We as architects can design ourselves.

And it took me a ton of practice to develop eloquence. In the beginning, it was against my better judgement. But skills are skills.
Look, I consider my self a well developed INTP, It took me a ton of practice to gain eloquence as well. But you have to realize that there are things you say that an INTP would just not be caught dead saying (Not just because dead folks don't talk):

Im going to show you folks the promise land.

This is perfect example.

All I am saying is go read up on INFJs, you might find that you have far more in common with them than you do with us.

[Adymus]

Read my intro post, Im trying to do away with some of the tendencies that box us in. Im a INTP at heart, but Im quickly becoming a frankenstein. I have been studying people and the literature for quite awhile. i think a INTP is possibly the only type that can surely be a chameleon.

Im going to show you folks the promise land. An INTP that is fully functional in the real world, or at least the world the other types believe in, is a powerful thing. We as architects can design ourselves.

And it took me a ton of practice to develop eloquence. In the beginning, it was against my better judgement. But skills are skills.
Look, I consider my self a well developed INTP, It took me a ton of practice to gain eloquence as well. But you have to realize that there are things you say that an INTP would just not be caught dead saying (Not just because dead folks don't talk):

Im going to show you folks the promise land.

This is perfect example.

All I am saying is go read up on INFJs, you might find that you have far more in common with them than you do with us.


edit: I read your intro post, spoken like a true INFJ.

[Beat Mango]

Bluesquid you are destined to be my arch enemy: I do not believe the analogy of socializing as a motor skill to be entirely apt, in fact I find it extremely flawed. I spent a lot, I mean a lot of time and energy trying to learn to be "social", and the conclusion I came to is very different to yours.

[bluesquid]

Bluesquid you are destined to be my arch enemy: I do not believe the analogy of socializing as a motor skill to be entirely apt, in fact I find it extremely flawed. I spent a lot, I mean a lot of time and energy trying to learn to be "social", and the conclusion I came to is very different to yours.


Arch enemy? see right there you differentiate yourself from a "social" person. A social person would carefully choose a word so they wouldnt inadvertently escalate the encounter. They definitely wouldn't choose "arch enemy" over such a brief and innocuous exchange. Social is go with the flow, avoid un needed divisions.

I found "Please Understand Me" in a used bookstore when I was 18. I turn 35 next tuesday. I have since acquired many books on MBTI, and taken the sorter multiple times. I am an INTP, but Im not content to live in that narrow mindset my entire life. Im going to create myself. That has been my aim since reading Carl Rogers at 21.

You may revel in your uniqueness, quirkiness, or intellectual gifts. I dont. Im on to learn new skills. Whats the point of being bright if its so focused? Specialization is for bugs.

[Beat Mango]

Arch enemy? see right there you differentiate yourself from a "social" person. A social person would carefully choose a word so they wouldnt inadvertently escalate the encounter. They definitely wouldn't choose "arch enemy" over such a brief and innocuous exchange. Social is go with the flow, avoid un needed divisions.


Sounds like the herd mentality... oh sorry, being divisive again - I mean the, uh, "we" mentality.

I've got nothing against the social or we mentality, I just don't think it should be idealised.

[bluesquid]

Sounds like the herd mentality... oh sorry, being divisive again - I mean the, uh, "we" mentality.

I've got nothing against the social or we mentality, I just don't think it should be idealised.

You seem to be taking this to heart. I dont mean to offend.

There is nothing wrong with participating in the majority of humanity. I may run with the herd, but i will never be eaten.:) And occasionally its nice to do some mounting.

And Im certainly not idealizing it. If a guy hunts with a bow and arrow, and you have a gun, it doesnt hurt to learn how to shoot an arrow accurately. Even if it takes time to master.

[Beat Mango]

But what's learning got to do with it though? Let's say you had a job where you needed to be in constant interaction with other people, day in day out, where there was a very strong team focus, would you be happy? And what if after that job, you had to come back to a share house where your housemates expected you to participate in what they're doing and hang out with them? Would you be comfortable with that? Maybe you would be, but if you were, I'd have to call you an extrovert. If not, could you really teach yourself to enjoy it, let alone thrive in it? I don't think so, personally, although you might be able to learn some things that help you get by.

I just think, why not do the thing that comes most naturally - that's all anyone else does. I should say, too, I'm not against socialising, I do enjoy hanging with other people, but if you're talking about socialising as a skill, then you can't beat an extrovert at their own game.

[bluesquid]

But what's learning got to do with it though? Let's say you had a job where you needed to be in constant interaction with other people, day in day out, where there was a very strong team focus, would you be happy? And what if after that job, you had to come back to a share house where your housemates expected you to participate in what they're doing and hang out with them? Would you be comfortable with that? Maybe you would be, but if you were, I'd have to call you an extrovert. If not, could you really teach yourself to enjoy it, let alone thrive in it? I don't think so, personally, although you might be able to learn some things that help you get by.

I just think, why not do the thing that comes most naturally - that's all anyone else does. I should say, too, I'm not against socialising, I do enjoy hanging with other people, but if you're talking about socialising as a skill, then you can't beat an extrovert at their own game.

I humbly disagree. You can beat an extrovert at their own game. Here is why.

During the process of learning to be extroverted, a INTP develops micro strategies. These are tiny truisms. A good place to start is "How to win friends and influence people" by Dale Carnegie. Things such as smile. My longest best friend used to mock my lack of facial expressions all the time.

Now an extrovert, a natural one grows up learning all these micro strategies. From friends , parents, etc. But the vast majority never learn past what they are taught, and at a certain point stop learning.

so you can exceed them by miles.

Also, I am not a extrovert. I can affect it at will. When it serves a purpose. Like talking to a woman that doesnt care about my new graphics card.

[KazeCraven]

Back to the topic at hand,

I would think that schizoid and INTP are correlated, but I would argue that schizoid is just an extremely polarized personality whereas INTPness is an inborn set of preferences that may or may not manifest as schizoid. Anyway, I find it odd that wikipedia has schizoids as lonely, but don't want a relationship. In fact, I have nearly opposite sentiments, not feeling (or perhaps, not aware of feeling) lonely at all.

I often question whether I am an INTP because, despite feeling (and being) distant from most other people, I like the idea of intimate one-on-one relationships. I can rarely be bothered to seek one, however, as the idea is far too abstract to pursue. Essentially, the idea is rather content-free, as I have yet to find any subjects that I am truly passionate about, and many of the stereotypical love relationships I see look like they are held together by illusions.

Anyway, I guess my point is that they seem to be two sides of the same coin. INTP/INTJ is the structure of the ego, perhaps initial wiring of the brain, that naturally leads to schizoid personality, but other MBTI types can become schizoid and INTP/INTJ often don't end up becoming schizoid.

[Anthile]

Hm, Tekton pointed me at this thread.


I have been diagnosed with SPD (F60.1) alongside with a Moderate Depressive Episode (F32.1) only few months ago. However, people keep typing me as INFJ but I think that is internet-only and in RL nobody would type me as a F. This is what it makes so difficult for me to type myself. What is the real me? What is the facade? Or are both sides real? How does that apply to the MBTI?
These are all questions I have no appropiate answers for.

[TheHmmmm]

According to wikipedia, all IN types in particular have a good chance of being schizoid:

"lack of interest in social relationships, seeing no point in sharing time with others, misanthropy, introspection."

In all seriousness, how much credence is to be given to personality "disorders"? Some of them are utterly ridiculous and often pairs of guidelines can make it almost impossible to not have one personality disorder or another (Avoidant/Dependent, Obsessive-Compulsive/Antisocial). It feels as though their purpose is to enforce a homogeneous population.

If the term "personality disorder" doesn't sound NWO, I don't know...

[bluesquid]

According to wikipedia, all IN types in particular have a good chance of being schizoid:

"lack of interest in social relationships, seeing no point in sharing time with others, misanthropy, introspection."

In all seriousness, how much credence is to be given to personality "disorders"? Some of them are utterly ridiculous and often pairs of guidelines can make it almost impossible to not have one personality disorder or another (Avoidant/Dependent, Obsessive-Compulsive/Antisocial). It feels as though their purpose is to enforce a homogeneous population.

If the term "personality disorder" doesn't sound NWO, I don't know...

I agree. It screams, "get in line and shut up!"

[Beat Mango]

Actually I think there might have been some merit in them when they originated - an extreme schizoid is a genuine problem, as is an extreme anti-social, obsessive, etc. The problem comes, I think, when the inevitable happens and more and more people are diagnose as being under the umbrella of the condition (think recently about the controversy regarding the over diagnosing of ADD for example). But I wouldn't consider anyone here really schizoid, something which was initially thought to be a bridging point between sanity and schizophrenia.

[TheHmmmm]

I agree. It screams, "get in line and shut up!"

Maybe it's just me, but I imagine an Orwellian nightmare with some guy in a sterile white labcoat and giant lab goggles telling me I have a "disorder" and pointing me to room 101 for treatment.

@bananamango

I would prefer to treat people either at their will or on a basis that they are a detriment to society. As you said, any disorder is prone to blanket diagnoses that can lead to wonderful treatments such as involuntary ECT.

[snafupants]

The neat thing about the wiki entry of Schizoid Personality Disoder is the Akhtar profile at the bottom. This talks about the substratum rationale for negotiating reality the way schizoids do. The one that really hit home was the interpersonal relations category; that dissonance between being withdrawn, shy, aloof, etc. and being really sensitive.

On a related note, I am convinced of my schizoid self-diagnosis. This was too spot on and specific to apply to everyone. I dont think of SPD as a pathology, more like a personality bent. Although other people will call this a foible because it deviates from the norm. Whatever, I am a generally happy person and I dont need someone to prescribe - and, thus, circumvent - my reality for me.

[snafupants]

A lot of people are talking about everything being a pathology and everyone qualifying for at least one disorder. I agree.

I think once one is of a certain intelligence, the chances of attaining specific disorders goes way up. For instance, high IQ and OCD, avoidant, paranoid personality disorder, etc. My psychology professor's doctoral advisor was diagnosed with eight personality disorders, and consistently refused medication. Also, my uncle - who has a validated IQ of 149 - has these intermittent twitches and weird OCD like beliefs.

Do you guys know of any person with an IQ over 145 who wouldnt qualify for at least one "personality" disorder? According to the DSM-IV that is.

[Dormouse]

So now the question is, is the human brain not designed for genius? Perhaps a certain level of intelligence is far too much for our fleshy minds, and can only stroll hand in hand with madness and despair. Troublesome.

Or...

I find it more likely that society simply hasn't yet learned to recognize or accept brilliance. If these traits are the results of a high intellect, then perhaps we should cease viewing them as wrong and unnatural.

Meh, I have no experience in this area, as my associates and I are all mentally stable and of average intelligence. I'll leave this debate to those with knowledge.

[WhoAmI]

I think there is alot in common with this I am A Schizotypal and INTP I am almost sure that this personality disorder is a coping mechanism for connecting with the world around us I have seen so many patterns and coincidences that I thaught I was psychic but read somewhere you feel a disconnect and feel more dead than alive so you zone out so much that everything that isnt pattern like, is a blur. Schizoid is almost the same but doesn't care about social connectiveness and INTP's can be defined as such I think a brain scan to determine if one has any degeneration in the frontal lobe I do believe will differentiate the two and determine if there is actually a connect in many some or all of us. But with so little INTP's they probably couldnt have enough info to Dx the proper conclusion what do you all think?;)

[TheHmmmm]

A lot of people are talking about everything being a pathology and everyone qualifying for at least one disorder. I agree.

I think once one is of a certain intelligence, the chances of attaining specific disorders goes way up. For instance, high IQ and OCD, avoidant, paranoid personality disorder, etc. My psychology professor's doctoral advisor was diagnosed with eight personality disorders, and consistently refused medication. Also, my uncle - who has a validated IQ of 149 - has these intermittent twitches and weird OCD like beliefs.

Do you guys know of any person with an IQ over 145 who wouldnt qualify for at least one "personality" disorder? According to the DSM-IV that is.

I don't know the IQ's of any of my peers as that's not something we're interested in, but I do know some smart and relatively "healthy" kids out there who don't exhibit any of the signs of any particular personality disorder. I tend to label them sociopaths, but maybe that's because I'm paranoid...

[Agent of Chaos]

plays King Crimson 21st Century Man in the background while reading this thread

YouTube- king crimson - 21st century schizoid man



Cat's foot iron claw
Neuro-surgeons scream for more
At paranoia's poison door.
Twenty first century schizoid man.

Blood rack barbed wire
Polititians' funeral pyre
Innocents raped with napalm fire
Twenty first century schizoid man.

Death seed blind man's greed
Poets' starving children bleed
Nothing he's got he really needs
Twenty first century schizoid man.

Wasn't trying to derail the thread, just think it's a great song.

[Reluctantly]

The perception of beauty is distorted by location, status, time period, ect. I have always felt sanity is the same way. I also define sanity differently. Not as the ability of a person to function or be successful in society; that would potentially make Paris Hilton, George Bush and Michael Jackson fully sane. Sanity is more the ability to perceive truth and the ability to distinguish what is and is not real. INTPs may spend a lot of time in their mind and in fantasy; but they don't confuse their inner world with the outer one. The intuitive nature of INTPs also helps us identify patterns and make predictions and thus understand reality fundamentally. I speak of course purely from my own experiences. I would argue that an experienced INTP is much more sane than the standard.

Truth and what is real and isn't...please read this (http://www.philowiki.com/wiki/index.php/Mind_and_Consciousness_Debate_Guide#Mind_and_Brain ) and tell me how you solve the dilemma of mind vs matter.

Sannnnnnnnnnnity...what does it mean to understand reality though? Do you realize by sitting back, identifying patterns and making predictions (intuiting), you miss out on the immediate aspects of reality (sensing)? Who is to say whether what you miss in doing so is of less value in understanding reality?

I'm a schizoid and I don't consider it a disorder. I'm always going to be a schizoid as long as I'm aware of both my own absolute personal freedom from all boundaries, yet aware that in order to continue functioning in any way I must constantly abide by boundaries set by myself or other people.... complicated further by the awareness that the struggles I put into following those boundaries are in the end pointless and void of meaning. Life is either to remain in a prison of meaningless, purposeless boundaries forever struggling against them, or simply die and hope for emptiness or some kind of change to replace it.

always?...and how do you know that? Do you even really know philosophically what it means to be schizoid? Does anyone?

The mind exists because of boundaries; freedom is not exactly about being free of boundaries.

It seems you're thinking in black and white - life being either meaningful or meaningless. And why would those struggles be pointless and void of meaning then? How would you define existence that is then purposeful? I can't imagine any such thing from your postulation...


On one hand, I can't get very attached to people or things, but on the other hand, theres really nothing out there that can hurt me because of it. If I try to go on and be attached to something or someone it's not entirely possible for more than a short while, for as soon as that attachment starts to hurt me in any way, my awareness of freedom quickly surfaces.
Being a "normal" person is possible yet impossible because it comes with an immense sense of cognitive dissonance. Being the truth-seeker I am, I can not ignore what I've already found to be true.

I don't look at it as a disorder, just an awareness.

Until you find it to become false?...I will try. :)

So now the question is, is the human brain not designed for genius? Perhaps a certain level of intelligence is far too much for our fleshy minds, and can only stroll hand in hand with madness and despair. Troublesome.

Or...

I find it more likely that society simply hasn't yet learned to recognize or accept brilliance. If these traits are the results of a high intellect, then perhaps we should cease viewing them as wrong and unnatural.

Meh, I have no experience in this area, as my associates and I are all mentally stable and of average intelligence. I'll leave this debate to those with knowledge.

I see all reason to believe brilliance and genius serves whatever purpose you assign as the meaning of reality. If someone assigns reality no meaning, then I suppose there is truly no such concept of intelligence for such thinking. Disagree?

[Adaire]

Ah, that's the problem with thread necromancy.
The original mentality is lost and broken.

Any comments I've made regarding Schizophrenia I both repeal and offer apologies.

Sannnnnnnnnnnity...what does it mean to understand reality though? Do you realize by sitting back, identifying patterns and making predictions (intuiting), you miss out on the immediate aspects of reality (sensing)? Who is to say whether what you miss in doing so is of less value in understanding reality?

I'm human and I reckon I miss much. The original statement is more along the lines that intps appear more resilient to delusion than other types. 'Senses' are easily fooled and 'Sensing' itself seems primarily characterized by an aversion to the abstract. Rather like a form of self-centric pragmatism. It only extends to the individual or familial, and then it becomes wildly unpragmatic when dealing with large groups and overarching concepts. The difference between memorizing a set a numbers in precise order vs identifying a formula or pattern so you don't need to memorize them and the data remains accessible.

Of course I'm merely trying to extrapolate my thoughts from back when. I place no stock in the MBTI or Jung these days.

Sanity is something I wrestle with, and probably always will. It's a very subjective and humanistic trait, and rather like morality.

Truth and what is real and isn't...please read this (http://www.philowiki.com/wiki/index....Mind_and_Brain) and tell me how you solve the dilemma of mind vs matter.

You to be more specific about your asking. As far as I'm concerned there is no dilemma. The mind is a basically physical pattern, possibly quantum. Not immutable.

Physical death disrupts the pattern, so the mind dies with the body and brain. Although given sufficient technology this pattern can likely be copied, in part and in entirety and stored on different mediums. People will probably concern themselves with the 'purity' of their minds when they do so, but it is a non-issue to me. What is the 'self;' you instinctively find yourself attached to it, but ultimately it is nothing sacred or inherently valuable.

(perhaps a 'self' is like a gene. The only one that survives is the one that selfishly perpetuates itself, even when there is no actual reason for doing so.)

[Moocow]

stuff
That's a really old post from me, and I don't even remember posting it or what exactly I was thinking when I did.

Schizoid isn't a philosophical concept, it's a psychological diagnosis. Sometimes I fit the definition and sometimes I don't, but I might have at the time of posting that.

And yes, some people know what schizoid means, particularly psychologists: literally it's a person that shows some affect / motivation symptoms of schizophrenia but is otherwise normal and not necessarily distressed by it. They may be chronically indifferent, unmotivated, and withdrawn.

"Freedom" seems to me to be a loose, relative idea. Freedom is only definable in the context of what one can be free from, and absolute freedom is impossible.

As for purpose, at this particular point in time it seems to me that all purpose begins with a fundamental ignorance. But, given that we are always ignorant regardless, it requires an ignorant assumption to rule out engaging in purpose.

My opinion of what is worthwhile however changes depending on my mood and at this point I see the evaluations of worth as meaningless. When I feel nihilistic, I just wait until I stop feeling nihilistic rather than believing in any kind of justification I come up with as a result.

I do not believe that the rationalizations we assume about our behavior are always, or even frequently correct.

[Reluctantly]

Oh, you know I came off kind of douchey, but I didn't mean to. I know I was necroing this, but since you guys were online at the time, I didn't think it mattered much. ;)

@Adaire
I've been wondering though. There are some patterns we can deduce and pretty much accept as absolute truth, but others not so much. Physics comes to mind for the former and relationships for the latter. If we spend time deducing patterns that won't hold up to the future, it's a waste of time if we are looking for what will be absolutely true. It's not even about being wrong or right or learning from mistakes, but that it is futile to spend any energy at all when the pattern does not have a rational process underlying it, if we are looking for absolute truth. Our truth will then be no more absolutely real than the sensors. If reality is a simulation, then that would explain the irrationality of relationships from our perspective.

Then what you call self-centric pragmatism seems like it's missing the overall picture. The pattern-recognizer would try to extract out some form of rationality out of the irrational (without knowing this is happening), some cohesion about it, as well as extracting accurate patterns out of the rational. The problem with the irrational is that whatever form is extracted can happen to be accurate for you, but not true to the rest of the world (which is why it's irrational). I know you said you don't like using Jung, but conceptually it's a form of introverted perception, and an individual epistemology - ergo subjective.

The self-centric pragmatist would concern themselves with what is rational, not allowing themselves to get lost in the irrational, but at the cost of limiting themselves from new rational patterns about the world as a result.

I was just wondering what you thought about this in regards to what you thought before, but now I'm not sure I remember how I was relating this to the topic; and I guess you already did that?


@Moocow
I don't know though. They are removing schizoid from the DSM last I heard, which to some is no more than a group of people that vote on what they think should be disorders, rather than look at it from a scientific perspective.

I mean let's say I don't like your behavior or I don't believe you are behaving the way I expect, all I have to do is claim a disorder, then the fault is in you and has nothing to do with me. That's a philosophical problem in itself.

To say it has nothing to do with philosophy seems peculiar. That's why I asked if anyone actually knows what a schizoid is. From what I've witnessed, if you gathered a bunch of people with the doctor prescribed label you would not find any similarities in behavior and experience outside of a similar existential problem of being unmotivated and partly disengaged from life, something I'm sure many have experienced at times in their lives.


I'm just completely baffled by all of this. I don't understand at all and I don't think anyone else really does either. That professionals can give off the notion that they do is...well there's nothing that can be said about such a thing, is there? The irrational is simply that, I suppose.

[Moocow]

I don't consider schizoid a disorder, myself. All I'm saying is that we do know what it means, because we made up the word to serve the purpose of describing a particular kind of disposition.
Whether or not that disposition is really a "disorder" is indeed questionable.

Some disorders are classified as such because they cause distress to other people, like antisocial personality disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder). I think it is distressing for some people to realize that there are those who choose to live indifferently and in isolation. More precisely, it may be that they can't understand it and make judgments based solely on their self-perception, in which such a case could only be seen as distressing.

[crippli]

The disorders are foremost a dis order for the community. It is not anything wrong with the individual. But some qualities are judged to not be beneficial for the evolution of the community. It's dependent on the political temperature and time of the day. Disorders are updated and deleted as authority figures designs how how we should experience reality by personal feelings and gain or more thought through ideas. Like in a religious country there will be other criteria then in a country who make more use of science to create order. Like I saw on the net, a sorcerer was just beheaded by the government in Saudi Arabia. Sorcery is obviously not wanted in this society. This would probably be a criminal though, but I'm not sure the exact difference between a criminal and a mentally disordered person. Perhaps it's the potential for acting and having acted?

Medical mental disorders is on the far end, and often causes problems to the individual as well, but this goes over the whole scale. Generally what is on the minus side(from 'common' feelings and behavior) is considered a problem. On the + side it's eccentric, special, unique.

[HDINTP]

First i will just ask a question: Why not?

[Enne]

Did the same person seriously argue with themselves for like half this thread?! :confused:

[Adaire]

What are you talking about?