*"Name Calling": Schizoid Personality Disorder!*

Post Reply New Topic

Heh. Special interest.

I don't know what difference it would make to have SPD or AS, because both are profound, serious and all-affected disorders. SPD can also seen to be as positive as AS.

I think the PD in SPD makes people think it's scary to some people, which totally nonsensical.

Anyway, this topic might be of interested for those who have not read it before: Schizotypal Personality Test (SPT-A)

Yes, SPD as a very partial, hostile, and archaic portrait.

In reply to those pointing out the differences they see between the two, I didn't mean that they were exactly the same thing, but that SPD perhaps represents one of the "old-school", introversion-hostile views of what are now often known as Asperger adults. An uncomprehending, narrow/extravert-culture-blinkered attitude towards what we now more often call Aspergers. Incomplete, aswell as distorted, skewed.

I think that it is interesting that "treatment" of SPD concentrates on the conflict between the need for closeness and the need for distance. Some "SPD" don't experience this conflict, and exist confidently, and harmlessly, in a state of "distance" from others, which in our society is considered practically an insult, or aberration.

But in monastaries this state is one of the goals, ( and guidelines exist about "no special friendships" ), because to them the only closeness which matters is closeness to god. Similarly buddhism teaches that it is attachment to things of this world which causes unnecessary pain/suffering, and that the path to enlightenment consists of freeing oneself from them, in seeing how deep attachments to people, places, etc, are vain and worthless, because simply participating in illusion.

In that light the psychiatric attitude to, and treatment of, SPD looks rather like an attempt to reintroduce/recondition someone into greater illusion, not increased understanding. The person diagnosed with SPD, who seeks help for the pain they feel as a result of the conflict, could be seen as someone suffering from religious/spiritual doubt, who questions whether closeness to god/the universe, ( as opposed to attachment to worldly things, relationships with people, etc) is enough. Perhaps what they need instead, for "happiness"/personal liberation, is an affirmation/recognition of the importance of that closeness to the inner life/"divine spirit"/the great "one". What is causing them to suffer is the all-pervading pressure in the west to take personal/outer attachments seriously.

The way in which closeness to other people has been measured and valued in western society has changed considerably over the last few hundred years. The concept of "true love" for instance, an increasing emphasis on intimate mental and emotional bonds between individuals, is a recent invention. Previously "closeness"/attachment to others was taken for granted in community so long as didn't act in such a way as to cause damage to or destruction of the community. Simply living within the rules laid down by society, of work or marriage or childbearing, was seen as sufficient participation/connection. People were not required to engage in "self-exposure" etc in order to "pass".

I wonder whether the increasing pressure in the west in the last 200 years or so to participate in, or search for, "closeness", a special relationship, emotional expression in the company of others, etc, might in fact be the direct consequence, ( as Inventor pointed out) , of a general/widespread loss of sense of closeness/connection, with a community, with the universe, ( unacknowledged/denied), for which people are trying to compensate. I don't know how much a constant diet of gluten and casein, ( food opioids), or of sugar, ( a painkiller, producing comfortable but separating numbness), and alcohol, might have contributed to this alienation.

Faced with people who do not seem to need this compensation, ( people who have not lost their sense of connection/closeness to god/the universe/the rest of the world, who experience in intense inner/mental activity all the connection that they need), western society feels/sees its own alienation. The vast majority project their own isolation onto such people and criticise them, rather than admit it as their own.

Until very recently in some cultures the kind of "closeness" promoted in western society was seen as inappropriate, or lacking in personal courtesy/respect, or a sign of immaturity. The definition of "closeness" as used to form the diagnosis of SPD is very culture specific.

I think that is a shame that in order to accept a person's detachment from such values society has to frame it as the result of biology, and for the moment at least as a disability/disorder, but homosexuality went through a similar evolution, from perversion, ( the "invert" of a hundred years ago), to illness, to gay pride.

.

Last edited by ouinon on 21 Sep 2008, 10:50 am, edited 3 times in total.

Well that's all very nice and positive Ouinon but it can also be like a monstrous kind of selfishness.

Wait a moment here!

Schizotypal Personality Disorder

is not the same as

Schizoid Personality Disorder.

They have some commonalities; but they are NOT the same! Schizoid means extreme-loner; schizotypal can also mean social isolation, but also eccentricity, odd beliefs, superstition, idiosyncratic speech... the "loner" component isn't as pronounced.

They are both in the odd/eccentric personality disorder subgroup. Schizotypal personality disorder has been described as being "very mild schizophrenia" with no associated dysfunction, and is linked with an increased risk of actual schizophrenia; but other than that the arguments for it being a mental illness are similar (and equally weak) as those for schizotypal PD.

Degrees of difference topic

Close but no cigar, though a cigar is often just a cigar, according to Groucho Marx, and maybe Sigmund Freud.

Thanks, Callista.

That's something that surprised me about the SPT-A. It takes so many aspects of schizoid PD into account (thus making a lot of autistic people score high) that I wonder if not many professionals actually differentiate between the 2 PDs just by the unreal believes or magical thinking criterion. The DSM-IV-TR does say that it's possible to differentiate between the 2 by a lack or presence of perceptual distortions and obvious eccentricity, but whether that's actually true or not...?

It's probably a spectrum, like autism. Different psychologists draw the line in different places.

Take into account Asperger's means a need to socialize just not doing it well. It doesn't mean you cannot have friends, doesn't mean everyone is an NT who is out to get you. It just means you do not socialize well, it doesn't come naturally.
SPD doesn't have this need. Unfortunately, without the proper intervention early on, personality disorders can develop.
Asperger's in itself does not denote hostility or the desire to be alone, but if not addressed as a child, the social awkwardness could leave children with Asperger's at a greater risk for developing comorbid personality disorders directly related to AS.

I think this is really interesting. My NT fiance was for a time diagnosed as schizoid and he's incredibly emotional, very warm. He just hid it from everybody but me
Idk, I guess the emotional range varies from person to person.

It does? How many people have I read posts from on wp expressing how little they can be bothered with socialising, how bla-bla most of it is, and that they would prefer to spend their time on their preferred solitary activities/interests? ( unless it is for a sexual relationship, mainly on the part of the guys) Hundreds by now probably. And that it is the conflict between this desire, and the expectations of society to do more socialising, especially in work ( and college?) environments which cause so many of our problems.

Well, actually you're wrong there too; it is precisely because some people with SPD feel a need/desire/longing for closeness/attachment that any/most of them become diagnosed in the first place, because they feel sad/miserable/depressed about not managing it, ( in a society which puts pressure on everyone to get "close" to someone or other, get personal, care more about their social life than their special interests/hobbies etc ), and to "seek help".


That's the kind of name calling that doesn't need to refer to any DSMs at least. No pretending there that it is an objective scientific judgement!

Yes, I gathered that many Aspergers/SPD are/have been accused of being selfish. Myself included.

I think that it may have a lot to do with a society which places increasing emphasis on complex unspoken, reciprocal social exchanges which SPD/Aspergers have difficulty following because of the perceptual problems, ( and this "tendency to diffuse the varieties of experience"? ) .

I also think it may be because these systems have become so complicated, which acts as a social selection device which disadvantages those for whom it takes too much mental energy/attention, and that previous social structures which codified social exchange much more clearly and rigidly were more favourable to AS/SPD as a result.

What do you mean by selfishness? I realised a while back that most people who used the word just meant that someone was not doing what they wanted them to do. And extraverts/"the socially needy" really do want/need others to participate in their rituals.

.

PS:

For instance detachment/impartiality is not generally welcome, and is often labelled selfishness. I have often been taken by surprise, and still am sometimes, by how much many people expect you to take sides/become partisan. That is something I have found seriously problematic about many "close"ish friendships/relationships; that they often seem to practically forbid further impartial objective analysis and judgement of actions or a situation ( involving them, or even sometimes when it does not).

.

I don't think that's quite right. I've had—off and on—different interests that qualify as the "restricted or stereotyped patterns of interest," and occasionally I get enthusiastic about them, but generally they are definitely not a source of "great pleasure" for me.

Schizoid personality disorder is mostly a matter of innate temperament: extreme introversion and also low neuroticism. The neurotic introvert, who feels, would be better fit with a diagnosis of perhaps avoidant personality disorder.

There's the trouble with putting people in boxes... they simply don't fit!

"Aspergers/SPD"

There is no Asperger's/SPD. They are different things. If you think you may be schizoid, you should lurk at that support group I quoted a while back, they are very different to Asperger's people.

What do I mean by selfishness? Well it's something different to the average selfishness, it's shocking. Like callous maybe? There's a contempt for others in it, it's deliberate rather than oblivious or unconscious or accidental selfishness. Comes from a place of superiority or narcissism.

Last edited by Postperson on 21 Sep 2008, 2:38 pm, edited 4 times in total.

As a child I was really sociable, incredibly so. AS children want to socialize on their terms. I was very much like that. I wanted everything my way appeared selfish and spoiled to others. You can doctor up the Asperger's description as much as you like but everyone thought I only wanted to do what I wanted to do, didn't care what others wanted. Once I was through with what I was interested in I absolutely did not want to do anything else, didn't matter if someone else did or not.
My mom used to take me to the mall and she stopped getting what I wanted first because she knew if she did, I would throw a fit as soon as I got what I wanted and demand to go home. I would carry on and whine relentlessly while she shopped for her things. You might think all children do that but I think I was worse than average.
When I was a child I wanted everything my way, wanted to talk about what I liked, didn't have much interest in other people and what they wanted or liked. As terrible as it sounds this is how I was and I am sure I am not the only one. This is what made childhood difficult.