Do I have HPD/NPD, or do you have ICDWPD?

Do I have HPD/NPD? Or do you have ICDWPDD (I Can't Deal With Personality Disorders Disorder).

Aparrently what defines a personality disorder from a personality trait is the fact that a disorder causes stress and problems for the sufferer and those who hold relationships with the sufferer. I would like to contest that.

Currently I am struggling with the aspect of my HPD which prevents me from getting motivation to do things without some kind of praise/attention reward. Basically, self discipline. However, I have a arsenal of other traits which cause others problems, but do not impact upon my state of mind whatsoever.

In my case I would argue that it is not my problem, but theirs. If someone is offended, stresses, or upset, it is because they chose to be so, or were to weak to prevent themselves from getting to their state. Either way, I have nothing to do with the rationality of their decisions.

As an example imagine an upsetting situation, a man gives you the finger and tells you that you are a failure, one person might shrugg of this meaningless insult, when another might spiral into a pit of depression. The example clearly shows that the remark/action does not cause depression, bu rather the depressed person was hyper-sensitive and prone to depression.

Basically what I am saying is that, logically, I can do as I please, and if you have a problem with it, then *you* have a problem with it.

On a side note, a lot of people seem to bitch about how they were 'hurt' by an HPD ex-girlfriend or friend. Dump them. Simple enough, if they are so terrible as you say, you don't love them (no matter what you seem to think). After all, love is cheap. If they upset you, ditch them. Their problem, not yours, right? If you stick around, then you get exactly what you were asking for.
[/RANT]

Going by your "logic", if i were to take a baseball bat and hit you on the head with it, i'd be able to blame your nerves for the physical pain resulting in me hitting you on the head with a baseball bat, and yes, i too could say that you would be the one with the problem, since YOU would be the one in pain, NOT me. I think you have no idea what a personality disorder is because if you did this thread would not even exist.

Zander beat me to the punch. What I was going to say went something like this:

(Please realize the following statement is made tongue-in-cheek, dear reader)
I'm sure that Ted Bundy had no problem whatsoever with what other people referred to as his "brutal" murders. I mean, his so-called "victims" were the ones gullible enough to buy the "I have a broken arm can you help me" act. What fools. If you think about it, it's really their own fault they were "brutally" killed, right? If their family is upset about it, they should just get over it because it was their daughter that made the stupid choice to talk to a stranger.

Um........ WRONG! This is an illogical argument because it doesn't take into account the freewill and subsequent actions of the killer. Even science has disproven this way of thinking. Newton's third law states, "for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." In short, it takes two to tango. Yes, your victims or whatever you feel comfortable calling them made a choice to have a relationship with you. But, your lack of emotion about them and pretending otherwise is YOUR action. So, please do not be childish and shirk your responsibilities. Your rationalizations are thin, weak, and embarassing. I hope that you can start to see that.

yeah i definetly agree with chickadee, there's just one more thing i'd like to add though.. digital.noface only talks about people's reactions towards him and his behavior, yet never about the cause of their reactions.. these reactions don't just happen on their own, they are caused by something.. YOU and YOUR behavior are the cause, digital.noface, which makes YOU and YOUR behavior.. a problem and just remember that just because you don't want to blame yourself.. doesn't mean you aren't to blame

Zander wrote:Going by your "logic", if i were to take a baseball bat and hit you on the head with it, i'd be able to blame your nerves for the physical pain resulting in me hitting you on the head with a baseball bat, and yes, i too could say that you would be the one with the problem, since YOU would be the one in pain, NOT me. I think you have no idea what a personality disorder is because if you did this thread would not even exist.

See, I would actually see it more as you ahve a baseball bat, and so do I. If you hit me, then it is my fault for not being ready, dodging, or hitting you first. Finally, if I am in the unavoidable circumstance of being hit, I can bitch that you hit me and you have a disorder, or I can deal with it and hit you back, or walk away, or whatever. The fact is, everyone hits each other (in the context of the analogy), if someone does it better, or more than others, than that is life, not a disorder.

digital.noface wrote:

Zander wrote:Going by your "logic", if i were to take a baseball bat and hit you on the head with it, i'd be able to blame your nerves for the physical pain resulting in me hitting you on the head with a baseball bat, and yes, i too could say that you would be the one with the problem, since YOU would be the one in pain, NOT me. I think you have no idea what a personality disorder is because if you did this thread would not even exist.

See, I would actually see it more as you ahve a baseball bat, and so do I. If you hit me, then it is my fault for not being ready, dodging, or hitting you first. Finally, if I am in the unavoidable circumstance of being hit, I can bitch that you hit me and you have a disorder, or I can deal with it and hit you back, or walk away, or whatever. The fact is, everyone hits each other (in the context of the analogy), if someone does it better, or more than others, than that is life, not a disorder.

first of all, no one should be blamed for not being "en garde" all the ######6 time. if you think that that's how life is then you are honestly living a lie. life isn't about attacking and getting attacked and oh my god you must be miserable if you think that way. if i were to hit you on the head you should not have to just tough it out, because it was not my right to hit you in the first place, just as if you were to hit me or anyone else they should not have to tough it out because it is not your right to attack people in the first place. and another thing that i think you do not realise, is that.. yes, others do bash others at times, but.. when that does happen it isn't to just victimize someone and profit off of their pain and vulnerability, it's because they genuinely do hate the person and think they do deserve bashing and yes it is part of life but no it is not always the best way to handle things. and if you actually take pleasure in attacking people then i'm sorry you don't see that's wrong but i guess that part of the disorder huh

AND a perfect example i have to try to make you understand my point is that in your last post.. you made 2 mistakes. You wrote: "ahve" instead of "have" and "than" instead of "then". You stupid illiterate FOOL! You can't blame me for attacking you because YOU are the one who made mistakes, NOT ME! You should have either not have made any mistakes in the first place or revised your text to see if you made any mistakes and then corrected them!

See what i mean?

Zander wrote:first of all, no one should be blamed for not being "en garde" all the ######6 time. if you think that that's how life is then you are honestly living a lie. life isn't about attacking and getting attacked and oh my god you must be miserable if you think that way. if i were to hit you on the head you should not have to just tough it out, because it was not my right to hit you in the first place, just as if you were to hit me or anyone else they should not have to tough it out because it is not your right to attack people in the first place. and another thing that i think you do not realise, is that.. yes, others do bash others at times, but.. when that does happen it isn't to just victimize someone and profit off of their pain and vulnerability, it's because they genuinely do hate the person and think they do deserve bashing and yes it is part of life but no it is not always the best way to handle things. and if you actually take pleasure in attacking people then i'm sorry you don't see that's wrong but i guess that part of the disorder huh

You are a little sheltered, or possibly nieve (Not neccessarily the same). In the real world, there are no such things as rights. Rights are an invention of society, and are just as easily ignored as they are respected. Think of this analogy; The roads have lines and signs to indicate what is and isn't allowed. Each driver has a set of 'rights and responsibilities' to which he adheres to. Theoretically, nobody should have to drive defensively, because everyone should respect the rules. This is often true in little sheltered communities. However, in the real world, there are no physical obsructions preventing anyone from ignoring the rules. As such, he who does not drive defensively, so as to compensate for the errors of others, will almost surely end up in an accident. The rules are there, but people break them (Intentionally or not), that is why we still have car accidents (Or in the terms of the previous analogy, baseball bat attacks). It sucks, but thats life.

This does not mean one has to stop enjoying life, it just means that you should always devote a portion of your time to caution. Always have a backup plan. The moment you fully trust somebody, without a contingency plan, you have doubled your odds of a catastrophy. Sometimes this may be worth it, I would say usually not.

[edit] Also, the only reason anybody does anything is to benefit from it in some way. Humans are selfish creatures, all animals are. If you didn't want to do something, you wouldn't. As such, even the most selfless act can be perceived as beneficial to the perpetrator. There's just degrees of benefit, and the theory of economic profit. Basically, even though all acts benefit me in some marginal way, to achieve economic efficienccy I should be using my time to benefit myself as much as possible. So when it comes to giving 20 bucks to charity or putting it in the bank, the latter option offers a greater advantage than the former, in most circumstances (Unless you were trying to dodge tax). Also note that the consequences of our actions aren't as intimately associated with our decisions as are our desires, as such the actual objective consequences of action are meaningless compared to the subjective desired consequences of action.

I do indeed take great pleasure in 'hurting' those who I feel ask for it by challenging me, but only in the sense of 'winning' against them. My enjoyment is not tied to the other persons suffering. I am no less contented if the person is a good loser as compared to a sore one.[/edit]

Zander wrote:AND a perfect example i have to try to make you understand my point is that in your last post.. you made 2 mistakes. You wrote: "ahve" instead of "have" and "than" instead of "then". You stupid illiterate FOOL! You can't blame me for attacking you because YOU are the one who made mistakes, NOT ME! You should have either not have made any mistakes in the first place or revised your text to see if you made any mistakes and then corrected them!

See what i mean?

Thats silly. I mean you're right, but it's semantical. It is my problem that I had flawed grammar, are you suggesting it's not? The fact is I don't mind. You are attacking me because of something I did wrong. As such, it is my responsibility to deal with the conflict my actions have caused. And I have, by dismissing it as irrelevant. Thanks for demonstrating my theory.

chickadee wrote:*snip*
Um........ WRONG! This is an illogical argument because it doesn't take into account the freewill and subsequent actions of the killer. Even science has disproven this way of thinking. Newton's third law states, "for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." In short, it takes two to tango. Yes, your victims or whatever you feel comfortable calling them made a choice to have a relationship with you. But, your lack of emotion about them and pretending otherwise is YOUR action. So, please do not be childish and shirk your responsibilities. Your rationalizations are thin, weak, and embarassing. I hope that you can start to see that.

Your arguement is riddled with falllacies. Firstly a logical arguement based upon freewill, rights, and responsibilities is self-contradictory. All of these things are social constructs and as such are subject to the rules of society, not logic. While social rules at times concurr with those of logic, they most often do not, and are by no means required to. Secondly You have made both a false asscosciation and a false conclusion in your sentence theorising upon Newtons law's relation to my stance. Newtons law is based upon conventional physics, not arguementative logic. Then you jumped to the false conclusion, and hackneyed cliche, of 'it takes two to tango'. This is meaningless, the saying 'You can bring a horse to water but you can't make it drink' is wrong because you can make a horse drink.(several ways, easiest is to put salt on it's tongue). It doesn't matter what the proverbs say, you could even call it an appeal to authority (at a stretch). Finally to top it off, you have a lovely 'ad hominem' fallacy, wherein you attack me instead of my arguement, followed by another red herring (False conclusion) and a baseless accusation. Nothing you have said has shown my rationalizations to be thin and/or weak (embarassing is another 'ad hominem', and subject to interpretation). Start argueing properly, and maybe I will begin to see the error of my ways, (If you are indeed correct, which is always a possiblity).