Some psychological theories I have related to dissociative identity disorder
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: February 7th, 2021, 7:46 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
- Location: Madison, Wisconsin; U.S.A.
- Contact:
Some psychological theories I have related to dissociative identity disorder
Multiple dissociative identity disorder is characterized by an individual using multiple names to refer to his- or herself (names, such as aliases). I argue that all persons have a baseline identity that is nameless. An identity (name) for an individual is a learned thing. For instance, John Doe iis the learned name of a person in possession of a body and brain. The baseline identity of John Doe isi his body and brain without the label of a name: The name of "John Doe" was learned by his person. Furthermore, I argue that "John Doe," the identity, is a dissociation from the baseline identity.
As John Doe is a dissociation from the baseline identity, then "John Doe" is a dissociative identity: The use of John Doe by the individual, in my opinion, qualifies the person as having dissociative identity disorder. It is claimed that the baseline identity is an "anarchic self," or "anarchic identity."
Socially, persons use names to refer to themselves. Understandably, a name may help members of society identify an individual (such as for legal reasons). However, I still interpret the use of a name means a person has dissociated from the baseline identity.
The disorder labeled "multiple dissociative identity disorder" occurs in an individual of whom uses more than one name or alias. For example, an individual may have a name he or she uses for business purposes and another name for Internet communication (such as John Smith): Both identities (names) are considered dissociations form the baseline identity (the anarchic self); thus, an individual has multiple dissociative identities.
The person that has these multiple identities thinks he has "control" over the use of the identities and their occurrence. However, with the theory of special relativity in consideration, the person with the dissociative identities has no control because he is interdependent with the dimensions of space and dimension of time. There is no conscious control of the identities.
These identities are considered to be part of a person's neural network, connected to one or more associative networks (enabling the identities to build up their own personhood), and compete with other identities for maintenance of existence by way of neural darwinism.
Since a person does not have conscious control of the identities, the identities are left to taking control of neural networks for their survival (however, it is hypothesized that the person seeks homeostasis, whereby the baseline identity seeks to be the only identity in existence with no occurrence of dissociative identities). The process of a dissociative identity being used by a person is termed "unconscious identity takeover."
A person may think he or she is in control of the use of an alias, such as an alleged "undercover" police officer but what is more than likely happening is that the conscious self delusionally believes it is in control (the delusion of free will) of the dissociative identity while the dissociative identity goes about behaving unnoticed.
For example, imagine John Doe gets into an argument with his girlfriend on Facebook. She blocks him, and the baseline identity (with John Doe thinking of himself as John Doe rather than a dissociative identity built on top of a baseline identity) signs up for another account under a different name (which in process is believed to mean the baseline identity has dissociated into an identity), which is named "Jon Doe."
John Doe thinks he is in control of the alias Jon Doe. Instead, the fact is "Jon Doe" is a competing dissociative identity that is going unnoticed by the baseline identity.
Thoughts? Questions?
-
- Posts: 957
- Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am
Re: Some psychological theories I have related to dissociative identity disorder
What will become understood is that 'a person' is NOT actually 'in possession' of a body nor of a brain. Although I do agree that a name/label is provided to 'a person'Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 8th, 2021, 9:12 am This thread is going to cover a couple of psychological theories of mine. One theory I have is related to a psychological disorder that I have termed "multiple dissociative identities disorder." The other psychological theory that I have is called "unconscious identity takeover."
Multiple dissociative identity disorder is characterized by an individual using multiple names to refer to his- or herself (names, such as aliases). I argue that all persons have a baseline identity that is nameless. An identity (name) for an individual is a learned thing. For instance, John Doe iis the learned name of a person in possession of a body and brain.
If you REALLY want to KNOW the 'baseline identity', then just answer the question, 'Who am 'I'?' properly AND correctly.Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 8th, 2021, 9:12 am The baseline identity of John Doe isi his body and brain without the label of a name: The name of "John Doe" was learned by his person. Furthermore, I argue that "John Doe," the identity, is a dissociation from the baseline identity.
Which is VERY True, in a sense, and is partly the reason WHY ALL of 'you', human beings, still do NOT YET KNOW, in the days of when this is being written, the proper AND correct answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?'. The main reason 'you', adult human beings, can NOT YET, in the days of when this is being written, answer that question, properly AND correctly, is because from birth you were ALL given "false" labels/names but which you grew up BELIEVING was actually TRUE. From birth you have ALL grown up being dissociated from thy True Self.Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 8th, 2021, 9:12 am As John Doe is a dissociation from the baseline identity, then "John Doe" is a dissociative identity: The use of John Doe by the individual, in my opinion, qualifies the person as having dissociative identity disorder.
The reason WHY ALL of 'you', human beings, in the days of when this is being written, are seeking to be accepted and loved for who 'you' Truly ARE is because NONE of 'you' YET FULLY KNOW who 'you' Truly ARE. You, obviously, can NOT love and accept "another" for 'who' they Truly ARE when 'you', "yourself", do NOT EVEN KNOW 'who' 'you' Truly ARE, YET.
To PROVE that 'you' do NOT YET EVEN KNOW 'who' 'you' Truly ARE, is done by 'you' INABILITY to answer the question, 'Who am 'I'?', properly AND correctly. Once 'one' can answer that question about thy's 'baseline identity', properly AND correctly, only then can that one Truly love and accept "another" for they Truly ARE.
Thee, ultimate, 'baseline identity' is thee True Self.Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 8th, 2021, 9:12 am It is claimed that the baseline identity is an "anarchic self," or "anarchic identity."
Do you KNOW WHY they do this?Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 8th, 2021, 9:12 am Socially, persons use names to refer to themselves.
They do this because human beings have evolved learning to separate and provide names/labels to make clear distinctions. They do this in order to better understand and make sense of the actual Universe they exist along with, or worded differently, to better understand and make sense of Existence, Itself.
Names also help the children of say, a mother of over a dozen children, to KNOW which one EXACTLY she is referring to when speaking to them. ("Legal reasons" came much LATER along the evolutionary chain of 'reasons'.)Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 8th, 2021, 9:12 am Understandably, a name may help members of society identify an individual (such as for legal reasons).
BUT a new born baby, or even a fetus, can be given a 'name' BEFORE the 'person', itself, has dissociated itself, or more correctly has even YET come to KNOW its True 'baseline identity'.Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 8th, 2021, 9:12 am However, I still interpret the use of a name means a person has dissociated from the baseline identity.
'Names', themselves, do NOT cause dissociation from the 'baseline identity', that is; thee True Self.
The reason WHY ALL of 'you', human beings, are STILL 'dissociated' from thee True Self is because discovering, learning, and KNOWING thy True Self just takes some time through and along the evolutionary process. In the days of when this is being written, 'you', human beings, are REALLY still just in the 'fetus stage' of this UNDERSTANDING and KNOWING process.
But, not to long now 'you' will ALL 'come to SEE'.
Are you here 'trying to' suggest that if 'you', one human being, just used one label/name ONLY, then 'you' would KNOW 'who' 'you' Truly ARE, and thus could answer, properly AND correctly, the question; 'Who am 'I'?'Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 8th, 2021, 9:12 am The disorder labeled "multiple dissociative identity disorder" occurs in an individual of whom uses more than one name or alias.
Fair enough. What is also True is when 'one' uses just one name, which is NOT associated EXACTLY and FULLY with the 'baseline identity', then that one would NOT have 'multiple dissociative identities' but rather would just have A 'dissociative identity', correct?Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 8th, 2021, 9:12 am For example, an individual may have a name he or she uses for business purposes and another name for Internet communication (such as John Smith): Both identities (names) are considered dissociations form the baseline identity (the anarchic self); thus, an individual has multiple dissociative identities.
Remember, the 'theory' of special relativity is just like EVERY OTHER 'theory'. That is; they are NOT what is ACTUALLY True, Right, and Correct, but rather just a guess, an assumption, or a presumption about what is just THOUGHT to be true, right, and correct.Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 8th, 2021, 9:12 am The person that has these multiple identities thinks he has "control" over the use of the identities and their occurrence. However, with the theory of special relativity in consideration, the person with the dissociative identities has no control because he is interdependent with the dimensions of space and dimension of time. There is no conscious control of the identities.
By the way, EVERY person is interdependent ANYWAY. No matter what.
Considering that it is ONLY 'you', human being, people 'things', which make up and use 'names/identities', then it could very easy be argued that it is 'you', people, who do HAVE control of the 'names/identities', which you ALL give to "yourselves", each "other", and in fact to ALL 'things', as well.Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 8th, 2021, 9:12 am These identities are considered to be part of a person's neural network, connected to one or more associative networks (enabling the identities to build up their own personhood), and compete with other identities for maintenance of existence by way of neural darwinism.
Since a person does not have conscious control of the identities, the identities are left to taking control of neural networks for their survival (however, it is hypothesized that the person seeks homeostasis, whereby the baseline identity seeks to be the only identity in existence with no occurrence of dissociative identities). The process of a dissociative identity being used by a person is termed "unconscious identity takeover."
But, considering that 'you', people/human beings, are NOT YET actually FULLY 'conscious', NOR even YET in FULL 'control' here, then you are RIGHT, in a sense, that 'a person does NOT have 'conscious control of identities, themselves'. Rather, 'you', human beings, are just COPYING and FOLLOWING on more 'unconsciously/subconsciously' than 'consciously' from "others" past behaviors.
Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 8th, 2021, 9:12 am A person may think he or she is in control of the use of an alias, such as an alleged "undercover" police officer but what is more than likely happening is that the conscious self delusionally believes it is in control (the delusion of free will) of the dissociative identity while the dissociative identity goes about behaving unnoticed.
For example, imagine John Doe gets into an argument with his girlfriend on Facebook. She blocks him, and the baseline identity (with John Doe thinking of himself as John Doe rather than a dissociative identity built on top of a baseline identity) signs up for another account under a different name (which in process is believed to mean the baseline identity has dissociated into an identity), which is named "Jon Doe."
John Doe thinks he is in control of the alias Jon Doe. Instead, the fact is "Jon Doe" is a competing dissociative identity that is going unnoticed by the baseline identity.
Thoughts? Questions?
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Some psychological theories I have related to dissociative identity disorder
Special Relativity?Dennis Blewett wrote:The person that has these multiple identities thinks he has "control" over the use of the identities and their occurrence. However, with the theory of special relativity in consideration, the person with the dissociative identities has no control because he is interdependent with the dimensions of space and dimension of time. There is no conscious control of the identities.
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Some psychological theories I have related to dissociative identity disorder
-
- Posts: 957
- Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am
Re: Some psychological theories I have related to dissociative identity disorder
A human being who travels close to the speed of light does NOT age any differently than those human beings who are considered "standing still" so I doubt very much that the human body, which 'you', "steve3007", are in when you travel close to the speed of light will look any differently than those human bodies who are considered "standing still".
See, all of this is just 'relative' to what just 'appears to occur', which is NOT necessarily what 'actually occurs'.
But one does HAVE TO LOOK far more deeply into all of this, rather than just accepting and BELIEVING what they have been previously told and/or have read. That is; IF they REALLY do want to SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things' ARE.
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: February 7th, 2021, 7:46 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
- Location: Madison, Wisconsin; U.S.A.
- Contact:
Re: Some psychological theories I have related to dissociative identity disorder
Thank you for responding. I appreciate your critical read of the post. Your initial post correlates with triggering a realization to me that I had wrongfully included the idea of personhood into the theories: "...enabling the identities to build up their own personhood..."
As may be found in the second thread the former person named Dennis Blewett created on this forum, in relation to the metaphysics of identity, he denied that personhood exists. Due to the contradiction, the theories presented here have been falsified. I think there is opportunity for refining.
As the prior person named evolution put it,
I find the philosophy of love presented by the user evolution interesting, but I am not sure how to respond on it. Nonetheless, the quip that one must learn to love oneself before one can love others come to mind. With such in consideration, it appears each new personal identity that occurs to an individual must first come to grip with an ever-changing identity.
I am a skeptic. I do not KNOW why persons use names to refer to themselves. I consider it a fatalistic act that occurs, beyond the control of any individual: A social epiphenomenon appears to be the proper explanation. I do not know if the question was rhetorical, but it may have been.
Yes, I agree (by "can," I presume it fair enough to consider it synonymous with "is" or "may be," so that a free act is not implied).
Upon reflection, it may be well enough to persist in the argument that the use (better said as "occurrence" due to absence of free will to "use" a name) means a person has dissociated from the baseline identity.
No.
The theory was such, that a name was a dissociation from 'one,' but the theory has been refined to exclude personhood.
I feel that the theory of special relativity helps deny the existence of free will. Thus, a person is delusional if he or she thinks he or she is "using" a name or alias by his or her free will.
As the user evolution noted, special relativity is a theory (might be wrong). As I typed up in my thread on this forum, "Refutations to the allegation of criminal guilt (legal compatibalism)," I argue that the cause-and-effect relation alleged to be in alleged light cones is nonexistent.
No.
As an aside, it appears to me that the alleged James Holmes who shot multiple people in a movie theatre years ago (in Colorado, United States) was experiencing dissociative identity disorder (possibly unconscious identity takeover, but I will have have to further examine the theory of unconscious identity takeover). The evidence for such is that it was said that he was "the joker," for what I recall, before he shot people.
It was alleged that he was schizoaffective and schizoaffective disorder led to his behavior. A former identity of my entity found the claim too broad and unbelievable, as there appeared to have been a lot of forethought put into his actions: It's not easy to make explosives.
-
- Posts: 957
- Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am
Re: Some psychological theories I have related to dissociative identity disorder
It would also, logically, follow that to 'love oneself' one would need to KNOW 'ones self', which then the next logically step would be how could one Truly KNOW 'one's self' if they can NOT YET answer the question, 'Who am 'I', properly and correct, correct?Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 18th, 2021, 9:15 pm Hello, evolution.
Thank you for responding. I appreciate your critical read of the post. Your initial post correlates with triggering a realization to me that I had wrongfully included the idea of personhood into the theories: "...enabling the identities to build up their own personhood..."
As may be found in the second thread the former person named Dennis Blewett created on this forum, in relation to the metaphysics of identity, he denied that personhood exists. Due to the contradiction, the theories presented here have been falsified. I think there is opportunity for refining.
As the prior person named evolution put it,I find the philosophy of love presented by the user evolution interesting, but I am not sure how to respond on it. Nonetheless, the quip that one must learn to love oneself before one can love others come to mind. With such in consideration, it appears each new personal identity that occurs to an individual must first come to grip with an ever-changing identity.
'Names/labels' are, essentially, the only REAL 'thing' that we can use to refer to "ourselves" and to EVERY thing "else", for that matter.Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 18th, 2021, 9:15 pm I am a skeptic. I do not KNOW why persons use names to refer to themselves. I consider it a fatalistic act that occurs, beyond the control of any individual: A social epiphenomenon appears to be the proper explanation. I do not know if the question was rhetorical, but it may have been.
I only use names/labels in say forums like this because I HAVE TO to be able to write (more) words/labels down.
And, I only use a name/label of thy 'self' when introducing to "other" 'selves' so that IF they want to get my attention more easily or reference 'me' to "others", they then have a particular name/label that they could use, for 'referencing'.
Okay. So if we exclude 'personhood', then what are you referring to now?Dennis Blewett wrote: ↑February 18th, 2021, 9:15 pmYes, I agree (by "can," I presume it fair enough to consider it synonymous with "is" or "may be," so that a free act is not implied).
Upon reflection, it may be well enough to persist in the argument that the use (better said as "occurrence" due to absence of free will to "use" a name) means a person has dissociated from the baseline identity.
No.
The theory was such, that a name was a dissociation from 'one,' but the theory has been refined to exclude personhood.
'Classhood', how 'rich' or 'poor' one is? Position relative to "others".
'Countryhood', what particular parcel of land one associates them self with? america, libya, et cetera.
'Religioushood', "muslim", 'christian", "hindu", et cetera?
'Positionhood', what job they have?
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Some psychological theories I have related to dissociative identity disorder
OK. I don't agree with you that the theory of special relativity helps deny the existence of free will but, given that you think that, I see why you mentioned it.Dennis Blewett wrote:I feel that the theory of special relativity helps deny the existence of free will. Thus, a person is delusional if he or she thinks he or she is "using" a name or alias by his or her free will.
-
- Posts: 90
- Joined: January 2nd, 2020, 3:53 am
Re: Some psychological theories I have related to dissociative identity disorder
- -TheLastAmerican
- Posts: 60
- Joined: August 15th, 2021, 5:18 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Myself
- Location: Earth
Re: Some psychological theories I have related to dissociative identity disorder
Now THAT was funny!
Stoicism is the wisdom of madness, and cynicism the madness of wisdom - Bergen Evans
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: February 7th, 2021, 7:46 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
- Location: Madison, Wisconsin; U.S.A.
- Contact:
Re: Some psychological theories I have related to dissociative identity disorder
Yes, but I presume there are various barrier persons would have to overcome. There is a serious public health issue on the Internet, at the moment, in my opinion.
Let's take a look at some research I did a little while back:
source: "Dissociative Identity Disorder: Internet Aliases as Dissociative Identities (revision 2) | dennisfrancisblewett's Library | Zotero." Title: Dissociative Identity Disorder: Internet Aliases as Dissociative Identities (revision 2). Author: Dennis Francis Blewett III. Date authored: November 5th, 2021.Thesis: An Internet alias of an individual (of whom generally declares to be of some name, such as a name for business relations or birth name) is a dissociative identity because such alias fulfills the necessary diagnostic criteria, as set forward in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.
See also:
(1) "Some psychological theories I have related to dissociative identity disorder." Blewett, Dennis. Onlinephilosophyclub.com: <viewtopic.php?f=6&t=17060>. Last accessed: November 5th, 2021.
(2) "Dissociative Disorders." Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth edition). Accessed from: <https://dsm-psychiatryonline-org.ezprox ... 5596.dsm08> Last accessed: November 5th, 2021 at approximately 1:15 p.m. Central Time.
Perhaps it's better to argue "...such as set forward in the Diagnostic..."?
Suggested reading:
"Dissociative disorders in DSM-5 - PubMed." Title: Dissociative disorders in DSM-5. Authors: David Spiegel 1, Roberto Lewis-Fernández, Ruth Lanius, Eric Vermetten, Daphne Simeon, Matthew Friedman. <https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23394228/> Accessed: December 30th, 2021.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023