Cont: Donald Trump has 'dangerous mental illness' say psychiatry experts at Yale... Pt 3

[xjx388]

I would say an inability to learn from his (or even acknowledge) his mistakes, along with a refusal to atone for his mistakes (such as firing people that testified against him) are dangerous abuses of our political systems.

Nitpicking in 3,2,.....

What do you think "dangerous" means when a mental health professional says someone is dangerous? Recall that Dr. James Gilligan is an expert in violence. He works with dangerous criminals and wrote a series of books about violence. At the Yale conference in the OP, he said, regarding Trump: "I know dangerousness when I see it." Do you think he was talking about the kinds of things you mentioned?

To be sure, the things you listed are bad things to have in a POTUS and I agree with your assessment of Trump. However, I don't see how any of that has any bearing at all on whether or not he is mentally ill. I'm sure you'd agree that it isn't necessary for him to be mentally ill in order for those things to still be true, yes?

 

[jimbob]

Exactly. The President of the United States sometimes seems to have a similar level of understanding of appropriate behaviour to a preschooler.

Interestingly, people who work for him feel the same way.
<snip>

Yup, that is why the national anthem performance was so striking.

His pretending to conduct it showed a complete lack of awareness. And I have seen preschoolers doing similar in similar situations. Probably 3- rather than 4-year olds though

I'm intrigued at whether GOP politicians have thought about exit strategies as they must realise that eventually it'll be even harder to deny. And saying "he seemed fine to me" will ring very hollow.

Also, would one really want to be involved in a conspiracy where one of the key players is becoming demented?

 

[theprestige]

Oh, I see your mistake, then: You're hung up on the idea that danger must necessarily imply "violent".

It doesn't.



You're Welcome!

I was replying to Recovering Yuppie's point about violence. He also mentions other forms of danger, which I have not overlooked (but also haven't addressed yet).

So.

If we discount the danger of violent outbursts, what other danger is there? The danger that he might do something dangerously incompetent? Sure, but you don't need the Yale Group to push a "dangerous mental illness" narrative on you, for that. You can just look at his degree of incompetence, say it's too dangerous for you, and conclude that he should be voted out of office.

You could even argue that he's so dangerous that he should be summarily removed for that reason alone. That's what the Yale Group is arguing. Do you support Dr Lee's call for the Cabinet to remove President Trump via the 25th Amendment?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Oh, I see your mistake, then: You're hung up on the idea that danger must necessarily imply "violent".

It doesn't.

Good point. Bad decisions about coronavirus could be very dangerous, for example, no violence needed.

Much as he touts his economic success, that's dangerous too. His house of cards will likely all fall down soon.

 

[theprestige]

"I think Donald Trump is selfish, ignorant, and incompetent. I think this is a dangerous combination that should never have been allowed anywhere near something as critical as the Presidency of the United States."

"I agree that he's selfish, ignorant, and incompetent, but not to the degree his haters imagine. I think the institutions of the federal government will be sufficient to keep him within the norms of presidenting."

"Oh yeah? Well, what if I told you that he's selfish, ignorant, and incompetent because he's crazy? If board-certified psychologists say it, you have to agree that it's bad, right?"

"One, it's unethical for board-certified psychologists to appeal to their authority in this way. Two, their claims are scientifically dubious anyway. Three, your argument that Trump is dangerously incompetent and should be removed from office doesn't actually depend on a medical claim anyway. So why even open that can of worms?"

Lather, rinse, repeat, for two years and two thread continuations, and here we are today. Nobody has anything new to say. Nobody is changing anyone else's minds. Dr Lee continues to make perfect sense to people who never needed her input to begin with. And Dr Lee continues to be dismissed by people who never needed her input to begin with.

 

[Bob001]

....
I'm intrigued at whether GOP politicians have thought about exit strategies as they must realise that eventually it'll be even harder to deny. And saying "he seemed fine to me" will ring very hollow.
....

They already know. They're just scared to death of Trump and his base. This is how dictatorships begin. They don't have to park tanks outside the Capitol; they just subvert the instruments of government.

WASHINGTON — Former Republican Senator Jeff Flake said that he thinks at least 35 Republican senators would vote for President Donald Trump to be removed from office if they could vote in private.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...-gop-senators-would-impeach-trump/3792866002/

 

[theprestige]

Much as he touts his economic success, that's dangerous too. His house of cards will likely all fall down soon.

That would make him about as dangerous as Bill Clinton, who presided over the dot-com crash, and George W Bush, who presided over the "great recession" (or whatever we're calling it). This is hardly a 25th Amendment scenario. Or even a manifestation of mental illness.

 

[theprestige]

They already know. They're just scared to death of Trump and his base. This is how dictatorships begin. They don't have to park tanks outside the Capitol; they just subvert the instruments of government.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...-gop-senators-would-impeach-trump/3792866002/

The whole point of elected representatives is that they have to answer to their constituents for the votes they take and the policies they implement. For representatives to remove the President in secret, without ever admitting their votes or answering for them to the people that elected them, would be the subversion.

If the people that elected you want Trump to stay, then you have only two options: Honor your constituents' wishes, or contradict those wishes and tell your constituents why. Secretly contradicting your constituents while publicly pretending to serve them is... what's the phrase? "Subverting the instruments of government."

 

[Cabbage]

What do you think "dangerous" means when a mental health professional says someone is dangerous? Recall that Dr. James Gilligan is an expert in violence. He works with dangerous criminals and wrote a series of books about violence. At the Yale conference in the OP, he said, regarding Trump: "I know dangerousness when I see it." Do you think he was talking about the kinds of things you mentioned?

I can't speak for Gilligan. I am merely speaking for myself when I say that a president can be dangerous without being violent.

To be sure, the things you listed are bad things to have in a POTUS and I agree with your assessment of Trump. However, I don't see how any of that has any bearing at all on whether or not he is mentally ill. I'm sure you'd agree that it isn't necessary for him to be mentally ill in order for those things to still be true, yes?

I'm struggling to find a point in any of that. I can't think of any individual behavioral trait that is uniquely associated with mental illness, so yes, I agree with your last question. However, I can think of many behavioral traits that are far more common among the mentally ill, so I also believe it to be far more relevant than you seem prepared to admit. Putting out a warning that a president is mentally ill because he is exhibiting those traits commonly associated with mental illness is simply a choice that I do not have a problem with in this case.

 

[Cabbage]

I was replying to Recovering Yuppie's point about violence. He also mentions other forms of danger, which I have not overlooked (but also haven't addressed yet).

In that case, I guess I'm trying to help you finally get around to addressing that.

If we discount the danger of violent outbursts, what other danger is there? The danger that he might do something dangerously incompetent? Sure, but you don't need the Yale Group to push a "dangerous mental illness" narrative on you, for that. You can just look at his degree of incompetence, say it's too dangerous for you, and conclude that he should be voted out of office.

Like I just said in a previous post, I think a narcissistic personality disorder manifests itself in his inability to acknowledge, learn from, or atone for his mistakes. I find that dangerous in a president.

You could even argue that he's so dangerous that he should be summarily removed for that reason alone. That's what the Yale Group is arguing. Do you support Dr Lee's call for the Cabinet to remove President Trump via the 25th Amendment?

I'm not even sure what that question means. I supported his removal through impeachment, if you'll take that as answer enough. It didn't happen, so I don't see how removal via 25th Amendment could be possible at this moment, either. But yeah, I'd prefer he not be in office.

 

[Cabbage]

"I agree that he's selfish, ignorant, and incompetent, but not to the degree his haters imagine. I think the institutions of the federal government will be sufficient to keep him within the norms of presidenting."

1. I don't think that's a given.

2. "He won't break the country" is not a good reason to justify anyone voting for someone like Trump.

 

[Cabbage]

"I agree that he's selfish, ignorant, and incompetent, but not to the degree his haters imagine. I think the institutions of the federal government will be sufficient to keep him within the norms of presidenting."

...and, of course, an insurgence of alt-right hate groups which, for example, resulted in the murder of Heather Heyer--Just how does that play in your calculus?

 

[theprestige]

In that case, I guess I'm trying to help you finally get around to addressing that.

Not really your job, but okay.

Like I just said in a previous post, I think a narcissistic personality disorder manifests itself in his inability to acknowledge, learn from, or atone for his mistakes. I find that dangerous in a president.

And I don't object to any of that. My only objection is that you'd be saying he was unable to learn from his mistakes, and that was too dangerous for you, even if NPD had never been brought up. And even without the Yale Group, it would still be a valid thing for you to say.

I'm not even sure what that question means. I supported his removal through impeachment, if you'll take that as answer enough. It didn't happen, so I don't see how removal via 25th Amendment could be possible at this moment, either. But yeah, I'd prefer he not be in office.

Dr Lee publicly called on the Cabinet to remove President Trump under the 25th Amendment. Specifically on account of the dangerous mental illness she saw in him. Do you think she's right to call for that?

 

[Cabbage]

That would make him about as dangerous as Bill Clinton, who presided over the dot-com crash, and George W Bush, who presided over the "great recession" (or whatever we're calling it). This is hardly a 25th Amendment scenario. Or even a manifestation of mental illness.

I think you're on shaky logic ground here.

To complete your analogy, show me what Clinton or Bush did that is comparable to Trump's tariff war. Recessions happen. They're not always the fault of the president. I can easily see the next one being the fault of Trump's tariff war.

 

[Cabbage]

Not really your job, but okay.

Actually, it is my job if we're in a debate and you conveniently don't bring up points that falsify your statement--I'll falsify your statement for you.

And I don't object to any of that. My only objection is that you'd be saying he was unable to learn from his mistakes, and that was too dangerous for you, even if NPD had never been brought up. And even without the Yale Group, it would still be a valid thing for you to say.

I do think it carries more weight to present it as a symptom of NPD.

Dr Lee publicly called on the Cabinet to remove President Trump under the 25th Amendment. Specifically on account of the dangerous mental illness she saw in him. Do you think she's right to call for that?

Sure, I really am fine with it. We still have freedom of speech. I'm glad to see people speak against Trump in any capacity.

 

[theprestige]

I think you're on shaky logic ground here.

To complete your analogy, show me what Clinton or Bush did that is comparable to Trump's tariff war. Recessions happen. They're not always the fault of the president. I can easily see the next one being the fault of Trump's tariff war.

Fair enough. To synthesize:

The Yale Group: "Donald Trump has a dangerous mental illness..."

Cabbage: "... and that danger could well manifest itself as a disastrous recession resulting from his tariff war..."

The Yale Group: "... and that's why the Cabinet needs to remove Trump from office immediately."

Between you and the Yale Group, we seem to have the risk, the remedy, and the underlying cause. Is there anything above that you don't agree with?

 

[theprestige]

Sure, I really am fine with it. We still have freedom of speech. I'm glad to see people speak against Trump in any capacity.

It wasn't a free speech question. It was a reasonable idea question.

To avoid any more wasted effort on your part: Nothing in this conversation is about freedom of speech. You can safely set that issue aside for now, and focus on other aspects of the discussion.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

That would make him about as dangerous as Bill Clinton, who presided over the dot-com crash, and George W Bush, who presided over the "great recession" (or whatever we're calling it). This is hardly a 25th Amendment scenario. Or even a manifestation of mental illness.

This false equivalence/whataboutism (take your pick) belongs in another thread.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Re dangerous:

“We have the cleanest air in the world in the United States, and it’s gotten better since I’m president. We have the cleanest water. It’s crystal clean and I always say I want crystal clean water and air. ... We’re setting records environmentally.”

He has proposed a 26% cut in the EPA budget.

It's one thing if this is just a horrendous policy difference. But it's quite another when the reason he wants this cut is because he has a delusion of grandeur there that magically he created: "We have the cleanest water. It’s crystal clean and I always say I want crystal clean water and air. ... We’re setting records environmentally.”

 

[xjx388]

I can't speak for Gilligan. I am merely speaking for myself when I say that a president can be dangerous without being violent.

Fair enough; but, this thread isn't about "Donald Trump has a 'dangerous mental illness' says Cabbage." Dr. Gilligan was part of the Yale Group and he wasn't talking about "dangerousness" in the context you are.

I'm struggling to find a point in any of that. I can't think of any individual behavioral trait that is uniquely associated with mental illness, so yes, I agree with your last question.

Here's the point - I think we are actually mostly in agreement, except for our view of the proper public role of medical professionals. See, you have a problem with Trump's behavior regardless of whether or not that behavior is due to mental illnesss and regardless whether or not his actions are dangerous in a mental health context. I have same problems with Trump that you do.

Since we agree on that much, what are we gaining by the unethical actions of the Yale Group? I think the answer is clear: Nothing. And if we've gained nothing, then it should be equally clear that the breach of ethics was unwarranted. Just as we'd like to hold POTUS to higher standards of behavior, I think we should hold the medical profession to a higher standard; indeed, that's what medical ethics is all about. Medical professionals have a duty to act ethically when they deliver information to the public. In order to justify a breach of ethics like this, there should be a real, specific danger to the country. In this case, I think it's pretty clear that there isn't such a danger and that these professionals are doing a disservice not only to the public but to patients who have been diagnosed with mental illnesses.

However, I can think of many behavioral traits that are far more common among the mentally ill, so I also believe it to be far more relevant than you seem prepared to admit. Putting out a warning that a president is mentally ill because he is exhibiting those traits commonly associated with mental illness is simply a choice that I do not have a problem with in this case.

I understand you but I don't agree with you. When a medical professional issues a professional opinion, they should act ethically and according to the standards of practice of the profession. The Yale Group has not.