The following are morning musings on the state of our President in a conversation with Oscar--
Hate to disappoint you Oscar, but I am beginning to suspect that the
shrub lacks the capacity to recognize that he's going to "get what he
deserves."
After speculating some more about his mental state, I think he's one of
perhaps many people whose brains do not recognize the relationship
between cause and effect. They know that things happen, but they cannot
figure out why. Perhaps because their brain doesn't keep track of the
sequence of events.
The psychiatric community refers to it as pre-frontal lobe syndrome and
the speculation is that it's a consequence of some physical insult or
injury of apparent insignificance. However, I'm beginning to think that,
given the large number of people who seem to have it, it may well be a
normal genetic variant. Sort of like people having musical talent or
not.
Pre-frontal lobe syndrome is often mis-diagnosed as borderline
personality disorder or even schizophrenia because the people who suffer
from not being able to recognize the relationship between their acts and
the consequences they experience, tend to react to any effort to teach
them with punishment or restrictions as if they were attacked.
All their behaviors are in the moment, prompted by their immediate
environment.
Because of that, they are actually quite easy to handle or manipulate
because they mirror the behavior of those around them. So, when people
are nice to them, they respond in kind.
This mirroring behavior also contributes to the behavior not being
recognized as such because most people like for others to follow their
lead and to repeat what they've told them. That's interpreted as "being
supportive." Problems only arise when there's no follow-through, in
terms of action, to the apparent agreeement. The lack of follow-through
is, however, to be expected since the person doesn't even know that
there's supposed to be a consequence to his agreement.
In a clinical environment, individuals with this syndrome are a source
of much frustration because their mirroring conversation with the
treatment staff gives the impression that they are making progress and,
as soon as they are separated from the staff, the behavior reverts to
mirroring the behavior of other patients, many with much worse problems.
This mirroring behavior may also give the impression of empathy. But
because there is no cause/effect realization, the impression is empty.
Anyway, a couple of weeks ago we speculated that what we were
considering was narcicism. But I don't think that's right because
Narcisus, although he fell in love with his image, i.e. himself, the
inability to recognize the relationship between cause and effect also
makes it unlikely that the individual can recognize that his interest in
himself has or has not been met. I'm not sure there even is a self.
Which would make sense, for example, of the shrub's apparent
astonishment at the conditions of being president--not having to answer
any questions. That's probably important because it's something he's
never been able to do.
He doesn't answer questions at news conferences not because he doesn't
want to, but because he doesn't know how. Sometimes his brain latches on
to a particular word it recognizes and then it produces a number of
related words that have been stored together with it and which may or
may not make sense in the present situation.
I think the reason the shrub has nicknames for people is because he
doesn't recognize them as individuals and he can't remember their names.
What he can do is repeat what he's been told, as long as the speech
isn't too long. The reason he often stumbles in his speeches is because
he's not actually reading. He's reciting from memory. Probably would
have made a good movie actor who has to be able to repeat the same line
over and over, without much change in inflection, as long as the "takes"
are not too lengthy.
If you look at the "Remind Us" video, you'll see what I mean about his
ability to say the same thing over and over again. He really got hooked
on that "Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction" line.
You know, once you've had an experience, there's a temptation to see the
same patterns again and again and it take a real act of will to view a
new situation objectively. On the other hand, this effort to be
objective may actually blind you to recognizing what you've seen before
as what you saw before.
I had charge as a Guardian ad Litem of a little girl in state custody
for ten years. Because she was in state custody, there was an effort to
address her "problems" with behavior in one institutional setting after
another. As a result I got to be real familiar with various "treatment"
programs and because she had no family, even got to participate in some
"family counselling" sessions that were part of one of the programs.
Anyway, absolutely nothing worked. None of the medications and none of
the restrictive environments. The odd thing was that in the eight years
it took me to catch on, she never ever misbehaved in my presence. That
is, she responded to me just as I treated her. (This, by the way,
annoyed her care-takers because she was often "abusive" with them. They
didn't like my questioning the ability of a patient to be abusive to a
person in authority either).
Long story short, it finally occurred to us (me and child psychiatrist
and psychologist) that perhaps a really supportive environment where all
her behavior was positively directed might do the trick--i.e. let her be
discharged from involuntary confinement when she turned eighteen and the
state could no longer hold her unless they could prove she was a danger
to herself or others. And it worked. Even in a State Mental Hospital
with few resources, she was able to learn to care for herself by rote
and to be peacable long enough to earn her release. That is, when she
was treated kindly, she responded well. You may say, duh. But that's not
how our society is increasingly organized. People tend to be punished
for missteps, rather than rewarded for being nice. Nice is
expected--except of course from the wardens.
Those who are treated well function OK. Those who suffer abuse at an
early age are likely to turn to what we call crime--to become aggressive
when frustrated or punished and to take what they want whenever they
want it.
Since it's quite possible for such people to function in an authoritarian
society, it seems quite reasonable to suggest that this "incapacity"
represents a normal genetic variant.
The mistake lies in trying to make people do things they can't; like
ride a bike when they lack the sense of balance required, or the
capacity to anticipate that if they ride down a steep incline at full
speed, they're likely to fall. Having fallen off a bike many times
myself, I am pretty sure that the Shrub's injuries to his face are the
result of going down hill too fast and then trying to come to a sudden
halt.
If I am correct and there are a lot of people like that out there,
making fun of him is not going to persuade them to vote against him. It
may well be that people recognize themselves in him. Can't figure out
why he should be made fun of since their loved ones have the same
problem and are such good people, in the sense of doing everything they
are told.
He should be rewarded for doing what his mommy and his advisers tell
him.