I found this interview interesting and decided to share.
I found this interview interesting and decided to share.
Super interesting topic. Curious what others think. Do you believe the zodiac showed SOME ( even if only one) signs of schizophrenia OR NO ( nothing, zip, zilch) signs of schizophrenia?
Don’t be a wall flower and write what you think. It’s a simple yep or nope. No explanation needed.
Me= yep
Super interesting topic. Curious what others think. Do you believe the zodiac showed SOME ( even if only one) signs of schizophrenia OR NO ( nothing, zip, zilch) signs of schizophrenia?
Don’t be a wall flower and write what you think. It’s a simple yep or nope. No explanation needed.
Me= yep
Nope. IMO, I think all his letters about the afterlife & collecting slaves was all hogwash he made up.
12 people have reviewed this thread and only one has posted their opinion. Thank you for that. To the others, come on look-e-loos have an opinion. Log in.
Anything is possible within reason. I wouldn’t rule anything totally out.
Should view cases of schizophrenia displaying positive symptoms at which point many would correctly conclude schizophrenia to be unlikely (at least during zodiacs reign).
Zodiac had a mixture of a Mood disorder and sever personality disorders, sociopath, borderline and ASPD clearly, not psychotic, very much in control.
Zodiac is a clear demonstration of someone feigning insanity for obvious effect.
It’s just a opinion.
Anything is possible within reason. I wouldn’t rule anything totally out.
When looking over the letters and handwriting from the zodiac, We see he can start writing straight and clear letters but than trails off.
Its like he doesnt stay focused for very long. If he was in a car race he could probably start with the pack but not a good bet on finishing in the top ten.
He wants to do well and have people see what he can do, like the young man in the video. But in reality would always need someone helping him.
Fundamentally I believe that most people who engage in crimes as serious as serial killing are unlikely to be mentally typical, or wholly sound of mind.
Clearly a severe mental illness like full blown schizophrenia is doubtful since it effects a person’s ability to function.
In other words you’ve got to be "crazy" enough to kill, but sane enough to carry it out.
Although I should add I don’t really think it’s right to use words like "crazy".
I believe the Zodiac was likely very odd, noticeably eccentric and likely possessed some schizoid traits, narcissistic traits, maybe bipolar traits, and the usual personality disorders found among career criminals. Now would he be considered legally insane? Probably not. Would he meet a clinical benchmark for all of those traits? Hard to say, but likely he would be subclinical in some.
Think of any famous serial killer. Are they crazy? Well people love to say for example, how "normal" Ted Bundy was, but if you’ve watched enough of the footage, you’ll soon realise he is off his rocker. He’s visibly manic in the courtroom, and his behaviour is profoundly bizzarre. Yet no doctor could decide on a diagnosis.
So what does all this mean? Serial killers often sit in a grey subclinical area of mental illness, but it is a myth to believe that they show no outward signs of oddness, or bizzarre behaviour.
What is fascinating about serial killers is that the rate of schizophrenia is no higher than the general population, but the rate of schizoid traits is higher. Serial killers are not especially likely to have schizophrenia, but there is a higher rated of personality disorders like antisocial, schizoid and schiziotypal personality disorders. To the best of my recollection neither DSM I or II differentiated strongly between those two personality disorders and schizophrenia. It’s likely doctors commenting on the case at the time had schizoid and schiziotypal personality disorders in mind and simply used the term "schizophrenia" as a catch-all term in the newspapers. Today schizophrenia is usually reserved for severe cases involving long periods of psychosis, but that wasn’t the case back in 1970.
Don’t take my word for it though, there is plenty of studies on PubMed and you can download contemporaneous versions of the DSM which will greatly help you understand what doctors at the time were really trying to say.
Dr. Grande did a video on the Zodiac’s mental health and I consider it to be the best work on the topic. His reasoning is excellent.
Do some research on cluster A and B personality disorders and you’ll understand what I am on about.
I think studying Ted K is the best way to understand Zodiacs mind set. It is my view that these two are identical in character and like Ted K the Zodiac had a unknown motive, Ted was bombing tech related people for a long time before anyone knew why. The Zodiac is the same and I do no but into the general consensus that’s Zodiacs motive was to cause fear and fear alone, he was fixated on a issue.
Also like Ted K the Zodiac is not a psychopath nor schizophrenic.
replaceable head wrote,,
Don’t think it,s right to use words like, crazy.
This post is going to help draw a better picture of the type of a person he was. Notice how in his letters he goes from a serious almost Lawyer type, but will also change a lot. When he starts calling police names and taunting, he could be in a pool hall and talking out loud to the guys in a pool hall or bar room. So there is those two sides to his character. But he doesn,t seem to hide it either, it looks like he starts writing and may stop for awhile. Then later, just keep adding to what he had already written.
No, from my experiences working with different kinds of psychiatric problems including multiple forms of schizophrenia, I don’t think this was the case here.
The Zodiac was too well organised and in control of himself. He also had a clear view on reality, this shows the way he describes events. His view is objective and correct and there are no indications of mixing up fantasy and reality.
Of course you could think of his thoughts of the afterlife as schizophrenic traits, but that is just one explanation out of many.
Zodiac describes his Zodiac persona as a different one than his normal life, but this is also normal and healthy behavior. When having parts of the self you cannot deal with, one normal thing to do is distancing yourself from that part. For example, you don’t think or talk about that part, or when you do you be very practical about the facts. You also can make that part a different ‘persona’, also this is in many cases very innocent, like: ‘oh, my younger self always used to do stupid things’. It’s not like I used to do stupid things, no, my younger self did.
With schizophrenia, the unwanted parts of the self are the base of the delusional thinking and hallucinations, but this would mean this isn’t something Zodiac has control over. If the Zodiac was schizophrenic, he wouldn’t be able to have worked this planned and focused.
You see the difference in the video. That man isn’t able to recollect the events that led to hospitalization, he is able to tell something happened at the piano, but cannot reconstruct the events properly. He blocks the part out that he cannot deal with, in that way he distances himself. In doing that, there’s mix up between reality and his mental world. You see this man really wanting to be normal, but having a different view on reality.
If Zodiac was a schizophrenic, it would have showed in some way.
Well said Meim and welcome to the group. I think what everyone is alluding to here is a Jekyll and Hyde character which I feel is fitting.
I find it pretty alarming that anyone could work with schizophrenics and have such bizarre ideas about what causes psychosis.
Whilst the exact biological mechanisms are not fully understood, mainstream psychology understands schizophrenia to be an almost purely biological phenomena.
The notion that psychosis, or catatonia is in anyway rooted in behaviour, or environment, is not only unscientific, it also somewhat daft, as even a layperson aught to be able to deduce through observation and interaction that the psychosis experienced by schizophrenics is as automatic as my pancrea’s ability to produce insulin, or my heart’s ability to pump blood. And it isn’t a learnt behaviour, or response either.
In simple terms we know schizophrenics have a lower number of a type of dopamine receptor, which plays a vital role in our perception of sensory input. The only effective treatment for schizophrenia is pharmaceuticals, mainly antipsychotics, which in simple terms increase the sensitivity of the remaining receptors. That’s the basics.
But I don’t think the Zodiac had schizophrenia by the current DSM V criteria, I believe he had a cluster A Personality Disorder, which in the 1960’s would have been likely to be diagnosed as schizophrenia. Type B personality disorders are what almost all serial killers have, and type A are also more common in that group.
Don’t take my word for it, look up Dr. Grande’s video on YouTube, he absolutely nails the profile.
People with Type A Personality Disorders are often fantasists. The can distinguish between reality, but the line is more blurred. They often exhibit odd beliefs and strange perception. The idea that a costume wearing, Halloween card sending serial killer wasn’t odd, or eccentric beggars belief.
I’ll give you a challenge, name one serial killer that wasn’t eccentric.
I find it pretty alarming that anyone could work with schizophrenics and have such bizarre ideas about what causes psychosis.
what?
Whilst the exact biological mechanisms are not fully understood, mainstream psychology understands schizophrenia to be an almost purely biological phenomena.
No, not at all, if there were there would be biological tests.
The notion that psychosis, or catatonia is in anyway rooted in behaviour, or environment, is not only unscientific, it also somewhat daft, as even a layperson aught to be able to deduce through observation and interaction that the psychosis experienced by schizophrenics is as automatic as my pancrea’s ability to produce insulin, or my heart’s ability to pump blood. And it isn’t a learnt behaviour, or response either.
No one was suggesting that, highlighting the distinction between schizophrenics and personality disorders.
In simple terms we know schizophrenics have a lower number of a type of dopamine receptor, which plays a vital role in our perception of sensory input. The only effective treatment for schizophrenia is pharmaceuticals, mainly antipsychotics, which in simple terms increase the sensitivity of the remaining receptors. That’s the basics.
Not entirely, It is the dysregulation of many varying regions of the brain each producing "positive" and or "negative" symptoms. Affects predominately the dopamine receptors but not exclusively, there are many different types of schizophrenia.
But I don’t think the Zodiac had schizophrenia by the current DSM V criteria, I believe he had a cluster A Personality Disorder, which in the 1960’s would have been likely to be diagnosed as schizophrenia. Type B personality disorders are what almost all serial killers have, and type A are also more common in that group.
Don’t take my word for it, look up Dr. Grande’s video on YouTube, he absolutely nails the profile.
His Psychological profiling of the Zodiac is best described as pedestrian and uninspiring with in minutes of listening to him, He is not wrong but he is not sharp in his analysis.
People with Type A Personality Disorders are often fantasists. The can distinguish between reality, but the line is more blurred. They often exhibit odd beliefs and strange perception. The idea that a costume wearing, Halloween card sending serial killer wasn’t odd, or eccentric beggars belief.
Stop watching Dr Grande, Zodiac is better explained with Personality disorder type B, this is a woeful assessment.
I’ll give you a challenge, name one serial killer that wasn’t eccentric.
Serial killer minus the killing part (which is eccentric by its nature) and that did not appear to be? Ted Bundy.
Well said Meim and welcome to the group. I think what everyone is alluding to here is a Jekyll and Hyde character which I feel is fitting.
I like this quote. And Mein wrote , When having parts of the self you cannot deal with, and than distancing yourself from that part…There is, the two sides again.
