Armchair Psych discussion of Jodi Arias

[IBsleuthin]

:furious: None of your business, but born 1959; studied philosophy at the University of Pittsburgh and Fairleigh Dickinson University; honors' scholar and member of Phi Beta Epsilon; Did my thesis on Nietzsche'sThe Geneology of Morals, studied classical Latin and did an oral presentation in Latin on the letters of Seneca to his pupil; undertook independent studies in classical Aristotlean logic and Nichomachean ethcis, along with philosophical jurisprudence; did graduate work....... but...... :furious: How does this really matter in relation to the Arias case? Or to anything I might say here? I do not, by the way, believe in corporeal punishment of any kind and do view it as a form of abuse.

Off topic but can I just say THIS? This is impressive. ..."did an oral presentation in Latin on the letters of Seneca to his pupil;" I can't even read the back of a one dollar bill correctly out loud.

And I agree with your post completely.

 

[SMK]

Off topic but can I just say THIS? This is impressive. ..."did an oral presentation in Latin on the letters of Seneca to his pupil;" I can't even read the back of a one dollar bill correctly out loud.

And I agree with your post completely.

aww, shucks , thanks:blushing:
I had about 5 semesters of Independent Study with a professor of classical Latin before I dared read Seneca. but thanks

 

[IBsleuthin]

I am. I tivo it so I can speed through a lot of the stuff. I'm going to start watching the first hour from today now.
I remember her talking about her parents but don't remember it the same way you do. I remember her talking about her mom and her wooden spoon, turning around and smacking them in the back seat of the car. Also that her dad's hitting of her escalated as she got older. She fell over furniture of something.

I can't diagnose JA because I'm not a doctor and I don't know how to interpret the tests. Samuels said she scored 17 or 15 for PTSD iirc and that's considered high. He concluded her PTSD resulted from her crime.

I just want to thank you here for your very honest response..."I can't diagnose JA because I'm not a doctor..."

Let's pretend this was a forum about cardiac problems offering advice by a world renowned cardiologist. If you posted to the cardiologist and asked for a diagnosis to your problems you would be told that he/she would not be able to diagnose you unless she could examine you IN PERSON.

The exact same would be said about all of this guessing on a diagnosis with JA.

Psychiatric disorders are very complex. Unless it's in the ER the diagnosing process really can take several sessions. Many factors come into play, physical appearance, grooming, affect, eye contact, tone of voice ect...ect...sometimes it's based on years and years of experience in the clinical setting that gives the psychiatrist a "hunch".

We can guess and offer opinions on here but diagnosis is beyond the scope of this forum.

 

[IBsleuthin]

I disregard the veracity of EVERYTHING JA says.
This does not mean I assume the opposite is true.
Do you really believe lying means the opposite is true?

In this case, as I have indicated previously, I DO believe that corporal punishment was used in her home as it is widely accepted in the US. I don't believe it was truly abusive in the sense that there is no evidence to show ANY of the Arias children were injured.

Out of curiosity, I'm interested in knowing posters' ages and education level...

Emphasis with color to address this statement.

Usually, (usually) this statement is introduced into a forum discussion because the person posting it wants to know where they stand on the playing field.

I would love to read more about your curiosity and need to know the ages and education level here?

Care to share?

 

[lil_buddy]

Emphasis with color to address this statement.

Usually, (usually) this statement is introduced into a forum discussion because the person posting it wants to know where they stand on the playing field.

I would love to read more about your curiosity and need to know the ages and education level here?

Care to share?

I was wondering why the lack of critical thought quite frankly.
To scrap a theory when facts don't support it seems fundamental in my view.
I'm kind of getting the feeling that there is not much interest in this forum in constructing theories around the known facts in the case - so I'm wondering if should just stop posting them.

 

[IBsleuthin]

I was wondering why the lack of critical thought quite frankly.
To scrap a theory when facts don't support it seems fundamental in my view.
I'm kind of getting the feeling that there is not much interest in this forum in constructing theories around the known facts in the case - so I'm wondering if should just stop posting them.

Unfortunately in the haste of my day, I often pop in and off the internet when I'm taking a break. With the volume of information on this case I can't keep up with most of it.

I'm interested in reading your theory, or theories! You most likely posted them back a few pages and I didn't read them.

If you are willing to re-post I would certainly enjoy reading them now. :seeya:

 

[SMK]

I was wondering why the lack of critical thought quite frankly.
To scrap a theory when facts don't support it seems fundamental in my view.
I'm kind of getting the feeling that there is not much interest in this forum in constructing theories around the known facts in the case - so I'm wondering if should just stop posting them.

I for one do not believe I am in any way deficient in critical thinking, given my background.

For me, it is entirely plausible that Arias might be concealing - to others, but even to herself - some knowledge regarding her father (sexual/physical abuse combined with her identifying with him on some unconscious level) which would make her give a contradictory statement about him.

So what is your theory, which is in keeping with the facts? And why are your facts superior to my own? Not everyone has to approach psychology from the DSM - human psychology dates back to Aristotle et al, though they called it philosophy or love of wisdom in antiquity...

I also think there is much truth in this essay, even though I believe Arais to be guilty and worthy of the death penalty:

Absurd Logic and Psychobabble After Dark
Posted on March 25, 2013
Of all the idiotic things talking heads and their guests have said during the course of the Jodi Arias trial, the one that really takes the biscuit is the reasoning made by one of the in-studio jurors on HLN`s After Dark on Thursday night. The show`s “bold accusation” of the night was that “Jodi brought the knife.” When asked why she thought Jodi brought the knife as well as the gun to Travis Alexander’s home, this female “juror” for the evening`s mock trial said Jodi wanted to make sure she had everything she needed to kill Travis “because Jodi is a proven narcissist.”

Terms such as sociopath, narcissist and pathological liar are tossed willy-nilly against the wall like flimsy, soggy strands of overcooked spaghetti, glibly quipped by TV talking head psychologists whose “diagnoses” in absentia are adapted to the prevailing HLN-sanctioned character assessment of the defendant in question. Unqualified anchors parrot the hackneyed terminology that invariably revolves around the above three disorders, regardless of the individual peculiarities of the accused. Unfounded assumptions about the thoughts and motivations of the defendant are then expounded upon, sometimes tailored neatly to fit the personality disorder ascribed, or even contradicting the cited characteristic, demonstrating downright ignorance. Jane Velez-Mitchell`s compulsive and incorrect use of the term “pathological” liar for Jodi Arias is a prime example. Pathological lying is not motivated by logical reasoning, therefore cannot be associated with premeditation or deception for the purpose of self-preservation, two charges of which HLN has already decided Jodi Arias is guilty. “Pathological” has, in the mouths of HLN`s talking heads, been stripped of its psychiatric specificity and instead become a superlative indicating repeated, excessive or extreme.

This is all rather ironic and hypocritical, especially in the light of the vicious and sometimes obsessive “pedantics over semantics”- to coin a silly phrase for silly behaviour – and scrutiny that has been applied during the past 2 weeks by prosecutor Juan Martinez and the media to the psychological testimony of Dr. Richard Samuels, the defense expert witness on Jodi Arias’ mental state. However clumsy Dr. Samuels may have sometimes been in presenting his findings, or flustered in finding the exact piece of paper Martinez requested, his insight into Arias has a hundred times more validity and integrity than all these soft-focused headshot psychobabblers’ clichéd and public-pandering opinions.

Viewers have heard the terms “narcissist” and “sociopath” used repeatedly by anchors, with tenuous explanations about how they apply to Arias, but often with no such relevance provided. One sees these terms regurgitated ad nauseam on the “Jodi” blog threads by people whose level of literacy belies any qualification they have apparently bestowed upon themselves to make such assessments.

http://babelbooth.com/2013/03/25/absurd-logic-and-psychobabble-after-dark/

 

[MeeBee]

If true, this is the kind of evidence they need to be presenting.
So far no diabolical priors have been presented.
It doesn't matter what any of us think or hope or say or suggest.

We know JA killed TA.
I haven't heard of any grievous behaviors before June of 2008.
It doesn't matter if we don't like her personality.

Why are they even discussing anything other than the circumstances surrounding the crime?

I'm confused as the defense isn't based on her mental state before the crime.

This is a discussion of her psyche and what possible mental condition she may have. Harming animals is textbook sociopathic early behavior. This is what I think she is. The dog was harmed then never heard from again. Seems fishy.

This is a speculative thread. That is what all of us are doing, even you. You have no evidence that the parents were abusive, yet you throw it out there. So I can throw out my opinions too.

:seeya:

 

[human]

Maybe not on the list they compiled - has that been made public or been entered into evidence?

The list I referred to is the trip roster list. In a news report yesterday, I heard that JA's name was originally on the roster or check-in list as to the one who would be along with TA. Haven't heard anything further about this since yesterday. If true, that means that JA was literally replaced as the one who would be going to Cancun with TA. This may be old news that escaped me as I missed the first two/three weeks of the trial.

It made me wonder if JA found out she wouldn't be going to Cancun on June 4. Or, as others have posted, she made a last ditch effort to be the one attending with TA and when that didn't work, she killed him. Although covenant is a strong word, she may have felt he broke one between them.

People have said that the trip to Cancun was so important because of the 1000 Places to Go issue. Cancun is not in that book. It is not one of the places to see before you die.

I am more interested in what it is that TA was going to out her about.

I was reading a mindless fiction mystery book and the author was talking about narcissists. She said that they do not want to be found out. I think the threats that TA made are what sealed his death warrant.

At first I thought that he could redeem himself by going with her to Cancun. I now think it was that he was going to reveal the scam. Whatever that was.

I do not think it is blackmail. TA would not have participated in photos such as we saw on the murder day if he did not think it was OK.

There is NO WAY that she wanted those photos to be seen. She went to great lengths to make it so she could never be associated with that day in Mesa.

 

[SMK]

This is a discussion of her psyche and what possible mental condition she may have. Harming animals is textbook sociopathic early behavior. This is what I think she is. The dog was harmed then never heard from again. Seems fishy.

This is a speculative thread. That is what all of us are doing, even you. You have no evidence that the parents were abusive, yet you throw it out there. So I can throw out my opinions too.

:seeya:

Of course. Yet we do not know anything more than that a dog was kicked in anger - this is not proof of text book animal abuse as precursor to human homicide. We simply don't know (but of course can conjecture). Even if it could be proven that Jodi adored animals and was as gentle as a lamb with them, we could still know that her murder of TA deserves punishment, and perhaps death, according to your beliefs....

 

[MeeBee]

Of course. Yet we do not know anything more than that a dog was kicked in anger - this is not proof of text book animal abuse as precursor to human homicide. We simply don't know (but of course can conjecture). Even if it could be proven that Jodi adored animals and was as gentle as a lamb with them, we could still know that her murder of TA deserves punishment, and perhaps death, according to your beliefs....

SMK, what evidence do have that anything that Jodi has said is true? How can you say that when you have been all but claiming that Jodi's parents must have abused her and that her childhood must have been hard? All we know of the dad is that he allegedly slapped her once and shoved her maybe. Yet that has grown into sexual abuse in some people's mind. I happen to think my conclusion is reasonable. The dog made her mad and no one ever saw it again. And it was tied up. Nobody here knows for sure any of it happened. That's why we are speculating. Why am I the only one getting jumped on for stating an opinion on something Jodi has said?

 

[SMK]

People have said that the trip to Cancun was so important because of the 1000 Places to Go issue. Cancun is not in that book. It is not one of the places to see before you die.

I am more interested in what it is that TA was going to out her about.

I was reading a mindless fiction mystery book and the author was talking about narcissists. She said that they do not want to be found out. I think the threats that TA made are what sealed his death warrant.

At first I thought that he could redeem himself by going with her to Cancun. I now think it was that he was going to reveal the scam. Whatever that was.

I do not think it is blackmail. TA would not have participated in photos such as we saw on the murder day if he did not think it was OK.

There is NO WAY that she wanted those photos to be seen. She went to great lengths to make it so she could never be associated with that day in Mesa.

Interesting. I had always thought that he was going to "out" her to the church and other people about:
1. the kinky sex (even though he was a participant, he could still out her.)
2. Maybe some lurid sex fantasy which SHE promoted? (something pertaining to pedophilia coming from HER?)
3. the slashing of tires and emails to Lisa, etc.

Do you think there may have been something else? A financial scam at prePaid Legal or something? Just curious. Thanks.

 

[SMK]

SMK, what evidence do have that anything that Jodi has said is true? How can you say that when you have been all but claiming that Jodi's parents must have abused her and that her childhood must have been hard? All we know of the dad is that he allegedly slapped her once and shoved her maybe. Yet that has grown into sexual abuse in some people's mind. I happen to think my conclusion is reasonable. The dog made her mad and no one ever saw it again. And it was tied up. Nobody here knows for sure any of it happened. That's why we are speculating. Why am I the only one getting jumped on for stating an opinion on something Jodi has said?

Apologies if I made you feel jumped on! I mean this in all sincerity.

Of COURSE I, too, am only speculating: I could wind up being wrong about all. I find this kind of hardball debate fun - really, I for one intend no hard feelings.

My opinions are my own, and who can say they have any more weight than others? I do pride myself on having a mastery when it comes to basic precepts and principles of deductive reasoning and logic; I have a background in applied ethics, as I attempted to show lil_buddy, and I am not thrilled with popular psychology - but anyone and everyone is free to discount my views, or to argue with them. why can't we all just get along???:great:

 

[Linda7NJ]

I disregard the veracity of EVERYTHING JA says.
This does not mean I assume the opposite is true.
Do you really believe lying means the opposite is true?

In this case, as I have indicated previously, I DO believe that corporal punishment was used in her home as it is widely accepted in the US. I don't believe it was truly abusive in the sense that there is no evidence to show ANY of the Arias children were injured.

Out of curiosity, I'm interested in knowing posters' ages and education level...

Above 40, less than 50

Masters


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sleuth5]

:furious: None of your business, but born 1959; studied philosophy at the University of Pittsburgh and Fairleigh Dickinson University; honors' scholar and member of Phi Beta Epsilon; Did my thesis on Nietzsche'sThe Geneology of Morals, studied classical Latin and did an oral presentation in Latin on the letters of Seneca to his pupil; undertook independent studies in classical Aristotlean logic and Nichomachean ethcis, along with philosophical jurisprudence; did graduate work....... but...... :furious: How does this really matter in relation to the Arias case? Or to anything I might say here? I do not, by the way, believe in corporeal punishment of any kind and do view it as a form of abuse.

Ave, SMK! :goldcrown:

 

[SMK]

Ave, SMK! :goldcrown:

:blowkiss::takeabow: thank you xx

 

[Woe.be.gone]

I disregard the veracity of EVERYTHING JA says.
This does not mean I assume the opposite is true.
Do you really believe lying means the opposite is true?

In this case, as I have indicated previously, I DO believe that corporal punishment was used in her home as it is widely accepted in the US. I don't believe it was truly abusive in the sense that there is no evidence to show ANY of the Arias children were injured.

Out of curiosity, I'm interested in knowing posters' ages and education level...

Your question is against websleuths rules. We can never sleuth one another. If a mod views it that way you'll be banned.

We are a varied bunch - just like the world we live in. Formal education isn't the sum of a person.

Everyone is entitled to discuss and provide input regardless of background.
We are not drawing conclusions here and have all been accepted as members. :twocents:

 

[Sleuth5]

Your question is against websleuths rules. We can never sleuth one another. If a mod views it that way you'll be banned.

We are a varied bunch - just like the world we live in. Formal education isn't the sum of a person.

Everyone is entitled to discuss and provide input regardless of background.
We are not drawing conclusions here and have all been accepted as members. :twocents:

:clap::clap::clap:

 

[Woe.be.gone]

People have said that the trip to Cancun was so important because of the 1000 Places to Go issue. Cancun is not in that book. It is not one of the places to see before you die.

I am more interested in what it is that TA was going to out her about.

I was reading a mindless fiction mystery book and the author was talking about narcissists. She said that they do not want to be found out. I think the threats that TA made are what sealed his death warrant.

At first I thought that he could redeem himself by going with her to Cancun. I now think it was that he was going to reveal the scam. Whatever that was.

I do not think it is blackmail. TA would not have participated in photos such as we saw on the murder day if he did not think it was OK.

There is NO WAY that she wanted those photos to be seen. She went to great lengths to make it so she could never be associated with that day in Mesa.

Here's an example where the point I addressed is totally ignored or side stepped. Isn't that called gaslighting?

A report, on the news, claims that JA was on the original roster or signup sheet to go with TA to Cancun. They were going for a business workshop, right? If true, that means JA had been replaced after the fact. That may have a lot to do with her actions and her state of mind.

Please don't read into posts that are meant to bring forth information/circumstances regarding the case as being excuses for her actions or in defense of her when they aren't meant to be. Comment not meant for human but for anybody who misrepresents another person's post.

 

[lil_buddy]

Your question is against websleuths rules. We can never sleuth one another. If a mod views it that way you'll be banned.

We are a varied bunch - just like the world we live in. Formal education isn't the sum of a person.

Everyone is entitled to discuss and provide input regardless of background.
We are not drawing conclusions here and have all been accepted as members. :twocents:

If you believe my post was against the rules; you should report it.

I did not sleuth anyone and you are free to ignore my question.

I also did not in any way try to take away anyone's right to post anything.