The plausibility of delusions

The science of personality is still in the dark ages. Though the natural philosophers have toyed with the complexities of virtue none have solved the mysteries of the psyche. Intuitively we know that the laughter, for example, is an essential component of our behavior and that misplaced timing on behalf of the subject begets ostracization. The human response loop as determined by behavior and self report is a fragile system few dare to deal with directly when there’s a breakdown.

Those who do dare tend to become more simple and logical, “Does that sound rational?” What they fail to understand is that in a state of delusion the matter at hand is multifaceted and plausible. An emotional approach is always more direct and less complex: “Are you frightened?” if the person seems paranoid, and then suggesting a course of action to deal with an over reactive Fight or Flight response system and a conversation regarding the dangers therein would yield more tangible and immediately beneficial results. The same conversation can be had with those who are experiencing delusions of grandeur, “Do you feel reckless?” or “Do you feel aggressive?”

The rational approach merely confirms the suspicions of the rational person and serves to alienate the person in need, whereas the emotional approach establishes the fundamentals of communication.

Let me know your thoughts!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s