Shared Psychosis

a reply to: Visitor2012

It's not a delusion, either. It's normal.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: Visitor2012

It's not a delusion, either. It's normal.

Maybe in your opinion. Talking to yourself, in my opinion, is highly delusional. Just because it's normal doesn't mean anything. Hence why I said it is 'socially acceptable', because almost everyone at certain times in their life, has done it. If you don't agree, I'm fine with that.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: Visitor2012

That's not schizophrenia.

I think what I'm talking about has more to do with split-personalities as opposed to schizophrenia. So I'll concede your point, yet maintain my opinion that inner dialogue where you are literally talking to yourself as two different entities communicating is a subtle delusional state of mind irregardless to how 'normal' it is.

a reply to: Visitor2012

You simply aren't aware of what a delusion is.

I have many personas interacting internally at all times. This in no way indicates there is false belief or irrational judgment taking place. It's called creative thinking, an overactive imagination, or scenario building. Personally I refer to my internal network as a round table of directors.

I am a highly self-aware being that does not suffer split personalities, or self-delusion. The way you're describing the state is far too general to be so liberally applied as pathology. The key is self-awareness (psychology would say insight). If you create internal dialogous and don't remain the master to your inner domain, then self-delusion will likely spring forth. Most people do the same as I, but perhaps not to the same degree and yet remain in control. They suffer no pathology.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

I have many personas interacting internally at all times. This in no way indicates there is false belief or irrational judgment taking place. It's called creative thinking, an overactive imagination, or scenario building.

You've just taken this to a whole new level. What a bunch of hogwash. Call it creative thinking if you like, I prefer to call it delusional.

I have a very active and creative imagination myself, I'm a highly productive artist as well. I think on a lot of ideas and vet them in my mind from varying angles and perspectives but there are no multiple personas working in the background. In fact, there isn't even a single persona operating in this body except for the one outwardly expressed when I'm interacting with other people. Thinking happens in this one, but no internal dialogue. Maybe it's not the same for you, I'm fine with that.

If you are playfully role playing in your mind as in these scenarios you speak of, or entertaining yourself with your imagination, fully aware of this fact... that's one thing and not at all what I'm talking about. But if you seriously have multiple personas operating in your mind, which communicate to each other and to you own persona as separate psychological entities..that my friend is as delusional as it gets. We shall have to agree to disagree on these grounds alone.

a reply to: Visitor2012

I hope you don't mind my comment on this.....I am a Schizophrenic-Schizoaffective. Twenty years of having invasive intrusions in my mental mindscape beyond terrifying. It's not constant, and it's not my internal personas or self manifested conversational creativity. Whatever Schizophrenia's root origin is, it's invasive, obtrusive and not initially present in the host mind.

Unusual, don't you think that the majority of "Schizophrenics" diagnostic criteria within the United States is somewhat vague in and of itself, yet all seem to target in on people having the same relative delusional perspectives, experiences, visions, auditory stimulation?

The psychical make up of the brain may allow for a higher instance of schizoid manifestations to surface, but from my personal experience, there is a definite degree of division between workable and harmonious internal discussions, and abusive and destructive manifestations.

Also, side note into to original OP topic:

I have experience mild cases of Group Psychosis while being treated in inpatient.

It varies depending on the degree of severity and what level of the ward you are in in how it manifests. On the higher levels, it can be as simple as everyone suddenly retelling their own shared stories relating to the initial psychotic discussion material, whereas on the lower levels.....oh heavens have mercy....when they all start screaming and flipping out simultaneously it can be very overwhelming. Usually that phenomenon is merely a reactive behavior, rather than a true psychotic episode manifest within all participants.


The sad thing about lower level patients is that many may be non-verbal and/or incapable to communicating their experience into an understandable language or picture set depending on the severity of their conditions and relative co-morbidities if any are present.

But does that observed behavior indicate a transference" of psychosis?

Depends what school of thought you study and adhere to as your primary diagnostic set.

Most people spend too much time worshiping the DSM-V for my tastes.

So let's get back to basics.

FIRST OFF DEFINE "PSYCHOTIC".

I mean, all the other girls out there are raving about "how wonderful" pumpkin spice lattes are and I personally find them disgusting. Am I the errant on for not conforming to the ideological and profitable Group Think or are they the ones deluded into a hypercommercialistic marketing dream come true?

But then again, in over twenty years of self study into my condition and custom tailoring my therapy in order to try and stay grounded in a consensual and agreeable reality set where I can somewhat function....I find the majority of other's "insights and commentary" into the very fundamentals of Psychology and Diagnostics to be just another excuse to poke fun at or blow people off who don't conform to their desired expectations.



Sorry for the rant, didn't mean to do that.

*shuffles back over to the art therapy table and shuts the hell up*

The thread title is "shared psychosis" which means a group is hearing something that wouldn't normally be detected by a recording device. Not sure the OP had any particular destination in mind. We obviously aren't all drinking Whiskey at the Super 8 in Perham Minneapolis.

This phenomena happens to me all the time, its hard to describe, some kind of non sequitur awareness that manfests in a brief psychotic episode. The thing is other people in the same place sometimes hear the same thing if I explain some of the esoteric pieces of the puzzle.

a reply to: GENERAL EYES

The psychical make up of the brain may allow for a higher instance of schizoid manifestations to surface, but from my personal experience, there is a definite degree of division between workable and harmonious internal discussions, and abusive and destructive manifestations.

I most certainly agree with you there. A significant difference between mind chatter and what you've described is happening with this condition. I'm no expert on the topic, your question would be better served by someone who has greater understanding of this phenomena.

a reply to: Cauliflower

This doesn't sound psychotic.....this sounds more Psychic.

originally posted by: GENERAL EYES
a reply to: Cauliflower

This doesn't sound psychotic.....this sounds more Psychic.

The fact that it is shared makes it psychic?
With me its often initially non sequitur and a somewhat alarming manifestation.
A resonance that takes time to kind of seep through objective information currently focused on.

a reply to: Visitor2012

You should listen to GE, she is on the inside of this and has a good perspective.

I didn't take it to a new level, I clarified and found exception in your words. You are the one who took it to a new level, having to add more complexity to try and remain in a stance of truth.

Just accept it, your wording was poor and called out.

For the record:

1. having false or unrealistic beliefs or opinions: Senators who think they will get agreement on a comprehensive tax bill are delusional. 2. Psychiatry. maintaining fixed false beliefs even when confronted with facts, usually as a result of mental illness: He was so delusional and paranoid that he thought everybody was conspiring against him.

Delusional

In literature the term generally refers to a character established by an author, one in whose voice all or part of a narrative takes place.

According to Carl Jung and the Jungian psychology, the persona is also the mask or appearance one presents to the world.[14] It may appear in dreams under various guises.

Persona

We're all actors and present personas to the world. If you have a single persona you present, then you must be a very boring person. I have many, most of which remain internal, but pop out where necessary. This isn't mental illness. Sorry.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: Visitor2012

You should listen to GE, she is on the inside of this and has a good perspective.

I didn't take it to a new level, I clarified and found exception in your words. You are the one who took it to a new level, having to add more complexity to try and remain in a stance of truth.

Just accept it, your wording was poor and called out.

I've read what you've written. I agreed with your initial point and conceded it. I disagreed with your other views and opinions and offered my own. Just what this forum is about. Cheers.

a reply to: Visitor2012

It's not an opinion, it's the actual definitions. If you want to believe in your own definitions of terms, then you are the one who is delusional.

You see how that works? I just used the term correctly.

having false or unrealistic beliefs or opinions:

a reply to: pl3bscheese

Psychiatry. maintaining fixed false beliefs even when confronted with facts, usually as a result of mental illness:

Let me expand on the word delusion as it goes far beyond common psychiatric definitions. Some people believe they are their psychological minds, they don't discern the difference between themselves and their mind. Some believe they are their bodies. Some people believe they are their personas, they believe they are fundamentally the content of their personal ego or identity. All of this is delusional, but I wouldn't necessarily call it a result of a mental illness.

I've enjoyed this conversation but I feel it's diverting to far off the thread. I've heard your standpoint. Let's move on. You want to have the last word? Be my guest.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

I have seen 2 girls, although harmless, spend a bunch of time together and then act, dress, talk just like each other, one was the obvious leader and the other the follower. I was so annoyed yet felt sorry for the follower. "The follower" lived with me for a couple years one time and we got along great! It wasn't till after she moved out that I realized she was mirroring me, buying similar clothes, even having same exact political views. I am still friends with this person, but there is a mystery to her i cannot put my finger on.

originally posted by: Visitor2012

originally posted by: Argentbenign
Schizos are never alone.

I think most people suffer socially acceptable forms of schizophrenia. Just look at how many people feel it is completely normal to talk to themselves, who have conversational dialogue in their own heads. They may not outwardly express it, like diagnosed schizo's do, but there's a split in them regardless.

This is your original post. Every single sentence is false. Talking to yourself, either internally, or externally presenting dialogue of multiple characters, is in no way or form indicative of mental illness by itself.

It is not indicative of a split, thou that may very well be the case. It can and often is the result of a higher order behind what you're apparently perceiving as a split. If you were correctly discerning, you would interpret it in the majority to be an ongoing integration process, which you are privy to witness.

I feel VERY strongly about this, it's incredibly ignorant to believe someone who is talking to their selves or thinking with multiple personas internally is mentally ill, or delusional. If this means I look like a jerk for needing the last word here, so be it, but you are just not correct here at all.

Reminds me of the Morphic Resonance theory. Essentially all energies are connected through universal consciousness and certain times or emotions or what have you can trigger other consciousnesses to react in a similar manner.

There are claims to teaching lab rats certain techniques that other rats in different labs, even some at great distances, would learn the techniques faster.

It also goes in line with how animals have know how to do what seems like preconditioned habits. Like say beavers building their dams.

This would explain megalythic structures being so similar in our progression, built so similar. Call it coding or some underlying guiding finger or some form of tapping into the universal consciousness.

I have really been leaning towards the Multiverse theory being correct and that would really nicely answer so many of the odd questions.

What happened before the big bang? Other big bangs in an infinite multiverse always and forever big banging all over the place constantly churning out universes, forever.

Spirits/Ghosts could be explained this way too as some sort of multiverse bleed through. In the multiverse, anything and everything, infinitely is happening. All of this Universe's past, present and future, constantly folding on top of each other, and that's just in one single universe.

Extraterrestrials would most likely have to bend space and time to traverse the cosmos. And in a multiverse reality that's easy, because it is guaranteed that it has happened, is happening and will happen. all simultaneously and infinitely.

Weird stuff like ball lightning, the double slit experiment, holographic universe theory, electric universe theory and a shed load of all sorts of strange oddities/theories/philosophies.

So again, the multiverse theory (if correct) could pretty much explains all anomalies, especially on the sub atomic scale. Where it appears particles are already appearing and disappearing (that we can see so far).

Where do they come from? The Multiverse. Anything. Everything. All at once(maybe lol)

a reply to: pl3bscheese

We're all actors and present personas to the world. If you have a single persona you present, then you must be a very boring person. I have many, most of which remain internal, but pop out where necessary. This isn't mental illness. Sorry.

What we present is not the same as what we are. A persona is a very dynamic expression of self, it is not a static, dead costume one dons on particular occasions. A single persona can express in many diverse ways, as introvert/extroverted, Excited/calm, passionate/passive, artistic/academic, funny/serious etc, with varying interests and desires. A single persona can be full of a wide range of diversity.

However, the more you talk about your pride and joy of these multiple personalities you hold within you , I think we've just gone full circle. Because, if you believe you have multiple versions of these operating in you, as if it were somehow necessary in order for you to be a non-"boring person" , then yes, perhaps you are delusional. Because you don't seem to have a thorough understanding about what a persona is, yet believe you have multiple versions of these operating within you.

a reply to: solve

Psychiatrists really hate shared states of mind, whatever they may be.

Why, because they can't charge them double the rate?

a reply to: pl3bscheese

I feel VERY strongly about this, it's incredibly ignorant to believe someone who is talking to their selves or thinking with multiple personas internally is mentally ill, or delusional. If this means I look like a jerk for needing the last word here, so be it, but you are just not correct here at all.

Every time I look at your post, you've added additional points. So I feel compelled to reply to them. Let me make my opinion clear. IN MY OPINION, take it or leave it, If you are talking to your own self, behind the guises of different personalities, as OPPOSED to the act of deliberating with yourself in your own thoughts, I BELIEVE you are highly delusional.