"Watchmen" As a Primer on Mental Disorder
codinginmysleep.com
"Watchmen" As a Primer on Mental Disorder
1–10 of 59 posts
Re: "Watchmen" As a Primer on Mental Disorder
#2Wow! I really enjoyed the movie, but this analysis by the author and the seemingly cohesive picture he paints of each of the 'heroes' is quite astounding ...
Re: "Watchmen" As a Primer on Mental Disorder
#3This is more an exercise in how conditions as described in the DSM IV can be applied to almost anyone as easily as a horoscope or fortune cookie.
A psychology prof once told us that the DSM isn't a diagnostic manual or any sort of medical text -- it's just a reference book so the insurance industry knows how to bill psychological conditions.
Re: "Watchmen" As a Primer on Mental Disorder
#4So this is something I've always wondered about diagnosing mental disorders.
The thing is, how strongly do the traits listed have to be manifested before it's considered a disorder as opposed to just being that person's personality?
In the comic book, these distinct personalities are what make the characters interesting. The same is also true of people in real life; if you take away every trait mentioned, you end up with a pretty bland person.
So is it simply a matter of degree, and the "disorder" label just gets applied when the traits get strong enough for others to comment on? Or is there a qualitative difference?
Re: "Watchmen" As a Primer on Mental Disorder
#5So this is something I've always wondered about diagnosing mental disorders. The thing is, how strongly do the traits listed have to be manifested before it's considered a disorder as opposed to just being that person's personality? In the comic book, these distinct personalities are what make the characters interesting. The same is also true of people in real life; if you take away every trait mentioned, you end up…
Most mental disorders are pathological versions of normal behaviors. You can also have "traits" of certain personality disorders, which is normal. In fact, most people will have traits of one or more personality disorders.
For example, a person like Steve Jobs who is a bit self-absorbed, but can focus on good things others do when need be might be said to have narcissistic traits. It's when you simply can't accept that anyone is better that it would be considered narcissistic personality disorder.
Re: "Watchmen" As a Primer on Mental Disorder
#6>While it's great to understand the psychology behind the characters, this knowledge doesn't really make the movie or knowledge that much better.
Disagree with this so much. Knowing the depth and psychology of the characters is what makes the Watchman so much more interesting than say Superman or even my favorite superhero, Batman. Watchmen is very open and honest about the fact that people who would do this are probably riddled with psychological issues. I also like the subtle suggestion the book makes that most superheroes would fall onto the reactionary side of conservatism. I doubt there would be many incredibly liberal people out there taking the law into their own hands, but for some reazon the first time I noticed this mentioned was in Watchmen. Just a brilliantly written story with incredibly deep and realistic characters.
Re: "Watchmen" As a Primer on Mental Disorder
#7So this is something I've always wondered about diagnosing mental disorders. The thing is, how strongly do the traits listed have to be manifested before it's considered a disorder as opposed to just being that person's personality? In the comic book, these distinct personalities are what make the characters interesting. The same is also true of people in real life; if you take away every trait mentioned, you end up…
[deleted]
Re: "Watchmen" As a Primer on Mental Disorder
#8So this is something I've always wondered about diagnosing mental disorders. The thing is, how strongly do the traits listed have to be manifested before it's considered a disorder as opposed to just being that person's personality? In the comic book, these distinct personalities are what make the characters interesting. The same is also true of people in real life; if you take away every trait mentioned, you end up…
"how strongly do the traits listed have to be manifested before it's considered a disorder as opposed to just being that person's personality?"
What's the difference? Why can't they be both at the same time?
Re: "Watchmen" As a Primer on Mental Disorder
#9So this is something I've always wondered about diagnosing mental disorders. The thing is, how strongly do the traits listed have to be manifested before it's considered a disorder as opposed to just being that person's personality? In the comic book, these distinct personalities are what make the characters interesting. The same is also true of people in real life; if you take away every trait mentioned, you end up…
Through diagnostic tests (each disease has tests associated to standardize the results and make it more objective) and differential diagnosis.
I don't have any names off the top of my head, but see something like the Apgar score to get an idea of what would go into evaluating a person's presented traits. For example depression has a series of question that identify a risk score and a threshold for treatment.
Some further reading if you are interested
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_diagnosis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_diagnosis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOAP_note http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apgar_score
Re: "Watchmen" As a Primer on Mental Disorder
#10> While it's great to understand the psychology behind the characters, this knowledge doesn't really make the movie or knowledge that much better. Disagree with this so much. Knowing the depth and psychology of the characters is what makes the Watchman so much more interesting than say Superman or even my favorite superhero, Batman. Watchmen is very open and honest about the fact that people who would do this are pro…
Indeed, it does improve the story by not just leaving you with a niggling sense that something is wrong with each character, but instead opens the realization that each is, in fact, a textbook-perfect example of that wrongness - dissected, analyzed, quantified and classified as such. It's a great improvement for those of us hyperanalytical geeks now inclined to re-watch the 4-hour director's cut with the DSM IV list in hand and finding every instance where each defining point is exemplified. (And then go meta by wondering where in the DSM IV such a hyperanalytical geek is so categorized.)