--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Feb 7, 2008, at 8:30 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Feb 7, 2008, at 8:04 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 7, 2008, at 7:12 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > I've spoken to a number of psychologist and psychiatrist > > > > > > > friends on this one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most point to "Narcissistic Personality Disorder" > > > > > > > > > > > > ROTFL!! > > > > > > > > > > Judy, do tell! > > > > > > > > > > What was your DSM IV guess??? > > > > > > > > I don't make DSM-IV guesses. Neither do responsible > > > > psychologists or psychiatrists make them about people > > > > they haven't at least interacted with. > > > > > > For deceased persons? > > > > > > Yes they do. > > > > And you've spoken to all these psychologist > > and psychiatrist friends to get their diagnosis > > of MMY just since Tuesday afternoon, right? > > Of course not. It was over time Dear Editor.
So it *wasn't* "for a deceased person." You're getting rattled again, Vaj, as you always do when someone calls you on one of your more ludicrous pronouncements. Observe Vaj's explanation of the circumstances under which professionals supposedly make such a diagnosis: > > > Keep in mind, death (irregardless of whether or not it's seen as > > > significant) is like a final stamp on a bank account or > > > administrators account. The "stamp" has fallen. Based on the > > > evidence between Mahesh Srivistava Varma's creation and death we > > > can (and will) look at evidence for a certain personality type > > > (or pathos). But now he informs us it *wasn't* the "falling of the stamp" that enabled his friends to make this diagnosis. <snip> > > Plus which, any professional who would trust *you* > > to give an accurate enough account of MMY to do a > > long-distance diagnosis is incompetent anyway. Vaj's furious backpedaling notwithstanding, the applies whatever the situation. > > Professionals do sometimes attempt speculative > > diagnoses of historical figures years after they > > die when they have spent considerable time studying > > the records. *Responsible* professionals don't come > > up with such diagnoses on a dime the day after > > a person with whom they have no familiarity has died, > > on the basis of a single person's account (least of > > all someone as unreliable as to facts and as highly > > biased as you). > > And of course, another "Judy's Golem" --a strawman and monstrous > distortion with no resemblance whatsoever to my intentions. <chortle> See above. Of course, my purported "straw man" was based precisely on what Vaj had said.
