On Feb 7, 2008, at 8:57 PM, authfriend wrote:
--- 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.
LOL. Dead persons have had their life-examples used as examples of their personality types, post-vivo, it's a simple fact. Stop trying to distort my intention Judy.
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.
Not at all. The data sample has a beginning and an end. That data sample has ended.
<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.
Yeah...uh huh...
