RPGs and mental health issues

[nedjer]

From what I understand of human psychology, you're probably using such a list to sort through people you meet, consciously or not.

We shape and adapt countless lists simultaneously through a process called ad-hoc, goal-directed conceptual categorisation. The lists are held in what can be described roughly as networked situation models, which are conceptual representations way beyond a standard list. These situational blueprints are checked for matches and used to rapidly construct something vaguely resembling what's actually going on in front of us.

As a psychologist this asks me to see people not as cognitively easy cardboard cut-out models / stereotypes, but to try to look further and see the 1,000 books they've read, the 100 concerts they've been to, the 15 years of childhood . . .

So, I'm not suggesting we ask the guy next door with the crystal meth lab to pop over and Al Pacino a Paladin. But it does seem very excluding to insist that players should be employed, comfortable with all animals or in a relationship.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

If I were self-concious about political correctness, I suppose I could struggle to define Danny in some way that narrows the candidates in the room to something that differentiates him from everybody else without using skin color or weight as a descriptor.

I could also be called "that fat guy over there"...but in some crowds, that's not specific enough!

I went to a small private HS with 4 guys named David, 4 others named some variant of "John", and a guy named John-David- first names were not a sufficient identifier, so last names, nicknames, and physical attributes substituted.

Later on, my college group included 5 guys named Brian, and last names were elusive. But everyone knew who "Black Brian" was!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

As a psychologist this asks me to see people not as cognitively easy cardboard cut-out models / stereotypes, but to try to look further and see the 1,000 books they've read, the 100 concerts they've been to, the 15 years of childhood . . .

And as a psychologist, you should know that our irrational, emotional side engages first, well before our rational mind kicks in. Making snap judgements- stereotyping- is at some level inescapable.

The late Patrice O'Neal had a routine in which he described crossing the street whenever he saw a group of young bald white males, even if they called after him that they were all cancer patients (or something to that effect).

 

[Janx]

So, I'm not suggesting we ask the guy next door with the crystal meth lab to pop over and Al Pacino a Paladin. But it does seem very excluding to insist that players should be employed, comfortable with all animals or in a relationship.

Ah, but you'll note, I revised Olive's definition to be broader and to nail the key points of WHY those attributes were important. Having a job or being in a relationship was detecting for something. That's the something that indicates a person who may be unreliable.

And I didn't say "comfortable with animals". I mean, does NOT like animals. Doesn't think puppies are cute. Doesn't like cats. Doesn't even like the discovery channel. Has no appreciation or empathy for animals. You know, like psychopaths. As a non-psychologist, this is something I would think a psychologist would have known about and written a paper on.

the same thing goes for music. There is something fundamentally off about a person who does not like music. Not just share the same tastes, but completely does not like any kind of music.

Of course, my basis for this theory is completely unsupported by any studies, etc. But I suspect it is an indicator of a problem.

 

[Style]

Whenever you are discussing issues that pertain to people with mental illnesses, and that discussion is happening in a group of more than four people, remind yourself that one of the people in this discussion is one of the people under discussion. You just don't know which one.

And if the other three seem like they're fine, then it's probably you...

 

[nedjer]

And as a psychologist, you should know that our irrational, emotional side engages first, well before our rational mind kicks in. Making snap judgements- stereotyping- is at some level inescapable

We all have a mass of instinctive biases and much of what we experience is a series of snapshots cropped to mesh alongside prior expectations and imagined entitlements.

However, a persistent list seems a lot more concrete and pre-meditated than a snap judgement. All the more so if the list is presented as good to go and mapped as a point of future reference.

 

[nedjer]

Ah, but you'll note, I revised Olive's definition to be broader and to nail the key points of WHY those attributes were important. Having a job or being in a relationship was detecting for something. That's the something that indicates a person who may be unreliable.

And I didn't say "comfortable with animals". I mean, does NOT like animals. Doesn't think puppies are cute. Doesn't like cats. Doesn't even like the discovery channel. Has no appreciation or empathy for animals. You know, like psychopaths. As a non-psychologist, this is something I would think a psychologist would have known about and written a paper on.

the same thing goes for music. There is something fundamentally off about a person who does not like music. Not just share the same tastes, but completely does not like any kind of music.

Of course, my basis for this theory is completely unsupported by any studies, etc. But I suspect it is an indicator of a problem.

The list is essentially unraveling as soon as it hits the ground, because there's a constant need to add qualifications and revisions as soon as people and their circumstances are considered on an individual basis.

So much so that the validity of fixed categories is reduced to an indistinct suspicion of a nebulous problem.

Which kind of presents a choice between dogmatically reinforcing the list on irrational grounds, (i.e. fear and suspicion - aka the Salem model); or scientifically finding that the current theory/ model doesn't stand-up to testing and reviewing it.

A revised blueprint might start with asking what causes the broken model to break and, in the case of screening and profiling social contacts, consider similarities to this example of social screening: 'OK girl, but one and done for me' - Creepy investment banker rated dates on spreadsheet | News.com.au

 

[Janx]

The list is essentially unraveling as soon as it hits the ground, because there's a constant need to add qualifications and revisions as soon as people and their circumstances are considered on an individual basis.

I think you are reading too much into the list I presented here. it's an exercise to review and rewrite what people were talking about right now.

I don't bloody well think anybody's going to come back here and refer to it as a master list of criteria to consider.

we're not offering a service here. Simply saying, the topic came up, consider the criteria you're using and adjust it.

 

[GSHamster]

We all have a mass of instinctive biases and much of what we experience is a series of snapshots cropped to mesh alongside prior expectations and imagined entitlements.

However, a persistent list seems a lot more concrete and pre-meditated than a snap judgement. All the more so if the list is presented as good to go and mapped as a point of future reference.

The thing is though, that it is like hiring. It's a lot better to turn down a good player than accept a bad player. Turning down the good player is unfortunate, true. But having a bad player makes the experience worse for everyone and can cause actual damage.

So if the criteria are somewhat too broad, that's an acceptable cost of using the heuristic.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

However, a persistent list seems a lot more concrete and pre-meditated than a snap judgement. All the more so if the list is presented as good to go and mapped as a point of future reference.

I don't think anyone is actually printing up a list to have on hand, just articulating so they can share with the online community...

Edit: like Janx & GSHamster said.