amethyst
Wanted: $1000 Reward
I am a Condor.
0 fics uploaded
Registration Date: 15-07-2009
Posts: 6248
|
|
Hey, Green, if he stood in the middle of the road and had a stare off with one, how many minutes until the goons either turn it around the other direction or just abandon it all together? Less than one, one, two, five?
And why does every one seem to think that Joe and Jason are psychos? Stubborn, determined, stubborn, defiant, and stubborn, I'll give you. But neither character has never hurt anyone unless it was in the name of stopping Galactor/Spectra. If just happened to enjoy it or went straight to the point of the matter, that just means he's happy with his job and he doesn't like to beat around the bush. He's not at all psychotic.
__________________
Perspective Alters Reality
|
|
15-07-2010 03:39
|
|
green
Gatchamaniac
I am a Condor.
0 fics uploaded
Registration Date: 15-11-2009
Posts: 7534
|
|
From my understanding of the terms, sociopaths have what we could call, for the want of the real term that I just can't seem to remember at this moment, 'anti-social' tendencies and psychopaths are out and out anti-social...
It's the level of tendencies that get the two mixing and matching at will and confuses people.
If I can (and I certainly will  ) use Joe as an example...
His determination to destroy Galactor.
It's for personal reasons for the most part. He does what he has to do in the name of protecting humanity, but deep down he's doing it because he has a need for justice and revenge (that's the sociopath bit)...
He can walk away from killing a bunch of goons with no remorse over his actions - because in his eyes, they deserved it and it was better them than him, his team mates or innocent third parties. When innocents do get hurt or killed, he cares - and takes it personally.
If he was psychotic, he would do it because he enjoyed it. There would be no reason other than that - and he wouldn't care about innocent victims.
If you compare Joe to Ken, it might make it easier to understand...
Ken does the same things - out of duty and for the safety of the planet - but does feel remorse over goons. He knows it's them or him, but he does his best (usually) to limit the collateral damage.
When innocent victims are involved, Ken gets angry because Galactor is evil and doesn't care who they kill. He rarely takes it personally because he knows exactly who's to blame.
Does that make sense? I'm tired since I'm heading towards 19 hours of no sleep, so I can imagine it's more than a little confusing...
So, a re-cap...
Ken - normal.
Joe - sociopath.
Sosai X - psychopath.
Yeah, just realised that the comparison between the three pretty much answers the question *sigh*
__________________
Exaggeration misleads the credulous and offends the perceptive. ~Eliza Cook
This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by green on 15-07-2010 at 12:37.
|
|
|
15-07-2010 12:35
|
|
gatchamarie
Gatchamaniac
I am an Eagle.
0 fics uploaded
Registration Date: 18-06-2009
Posts: 5129
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by green
From my understanding of the terms, sociopaths have what we could call, for the want of the real term that I just can't seem to remember at this moment, 'anti-social' tendencies and psychopaths are out and out anti-social...
It's the level of tendencies that get the two mixing and matching at will and confuses people.
If I can (and I certainly will ) use Joe as an example...
His determination to destroy Galactor.
It's for personal reasons for the most part. He does what he has to do in the name of protecting humanity, but deep down he's doing it because he has a need for justice and revenge (that's the sociopath bit)...
He can walk away from killing a bunch of goons with no remorse over his actions - because in his eyes, they deserved it and it was better them than him, his team mates or innocent third parties. When innocents do get hurt or killed, he cares - and takes it personally.
If he was psychotic, he would do it because he enjoyed it. There would be no reason other than that - and he wouldn't care about innocent victims.
If you compare Joe to Ken, it might make it easier to understand...
Ken does the same things - out of duty and for the safety of the planet - but does feel remorse over goons. He knows it's them or him, but he does his best (usually) to limit the collateral damage.
When innocent victims are involved, Ken gets angry because Galactor is evil and doesn't care who they kill. He rarely takes it personally because he knows exactly who's to blame.
Does that make sense? I'm tired since I'm heading towards 19 hours of no sleep, so I can imagine it's more than a little confusing...
So, a re-cap...
Ken - normal.
Joe - sociopath.
Sosai X - psychopath.
Yeah, just realised that the comparison between the three pretty much answers the question *sigh* |
|
That was a perfect explanation, Green! If 19 hours of no sleep has this effect on you, I don't know what more hours can do!!!! ... but, I honestly do not wish to know as you need to have more sleep not less!! ... and I so need some too!! Now, I have to switch off as I'm going for a very longed for vacation, hoping that nothing goes wrong, for a change! Will hopefully join in next week! In the meantime, we could think under which category of the above we may fit in!!!
__________________
To be or not to be a gatchamaniac - that's the dilemma!
|
|
|
15-07-2010 13:53
|
|
amethyst
Wanted: $1000 Reward
I am a Condor.
0 fics uploaded
Registration Date: 15-07-2009
Posts: 6248
|
|
Lyon, you've hit it right one in my opinion. If he can control feeling's and actions to a reasonable degree, if he thinks about how is actions affect others, if actions are a choice rather than compulsion (control of behavior) than neither apply. Plus, usually -- at least in what I have seen, if he were truely psychotic/sociopath/ASPD, the behaviors would not stop at Galactor.
(For what it's worth, my own experience with psychology is limited to a few CC classes, a lot of personal reading/research to help my son, and a fondness for pyschological criticism in literature -- any read "The Yellow Wallpaper" or "A Rose for Emily"?)
Candi, I knew we had to be able to agree on something!  
__________________
Perspective Alters Reality
This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by amethyst on 15-07-2010 at 15:59.
|
|
|
15-07-2010 15:58
|
|
green
Gatchamaniac
I am a Condor.
0 fics uploaded
Registration Date: 15-11-2009
Posts: 7534
|
|
Lyon, I should have prefaced my post with IMHO.
My opinion, not labels - so I will apologise for that.
However, my opinion is based on a lecture I attended in my second year of university as part of the compulsory psychology component of my course.
I remember it well, even though it was 15 or so years ago. The lecturer was a guest speaker, and by far the best we that we had in the two years.
He made things easy by using examples we could relate to... And he was funny as hell to boot!
He used two soldiers to define 'normal' (yes, with the quotation marks!) and 'sociopath'.
The first would be the one who did a tour of duty because they were sent.
The second would sign up for a second tour of duty because the military action or war had become personal and 'necessary' to them.
He was very careful to explain that sociopathic (where is the damn spell check??) tendenancies aren't all bad as they often relate to survival and even love. At no time did he mention a lack of empathy as defining someone with sociopathic tendenancies...
To define 'pyschopath' he used Martin Bryant - the man who shot something like 32 people in Port Arthur, Tasmania. He did definitely mention the lack of empathy when discussing this guy!
Bryant chased a 6 year old child around a tree playing 'peek-a-boo' with her after he had shot and killed her mother and three year old sister in front of her.... And then killed her. Witnesses say he was laughing the whole time!!
*shakes self* Anyway... As I was saying. My opinion is based on definitions I learned fifteen years ago. In the world of psychology and the like, that's a long time for a definition since so much of the discipline is subjected to fluid trends and beliefs. Freud versus Jung, for example.
It also depends on where you learn them too. I'm in Australia, went to an Australian University and the guest speaker was also an Australian psychologist. Wikipedia cites an American text. Just as we all speak English there are differences in our languages, some subtle and some not - and those differences may well show up in a field that is quite often subjective and not objective.
__________________
Exaggeration misleads the credulous and offends the perceptive. ~Eliza Cook
|
|
|
16-07-2010 02:42
|
|
tatsunokofan
Gatch Guru
0 fics uploaded
Registration Date: 03-12-2006
Posts: 1513
|
|
Hi all!
This video is certainly interesting to see, but I'm glad to see that people aren't getting their hopes up regarding this film ever being made. After all, this teaser isn't a newly made product. Instead, it was produced before the studio shut down earlier this year. Regardless, it's nice that it has surfaced for us to see.
As far as Imagi is concerned, the company that owns the studio is apparently still involved in reorganization efforts. Unfortunately, their latest announcement, a legally required Profit Warning from July 15th, makes it seem unlikely that many people would invest any sizable amount of money in them.
http://www.imagi.com.hk/web/archives/pdf...10071 5E(2).pdf
| quote: | PROFIT WARNING
The Board wishes to inform the Shareholders and potential investors that the audited consolidated loss of the Group for the year ended 31 March 2010 are expected to increase significantly as compared to the loss recorded by the Group for the year ended 31 March 2009.
Shareholders and potential investors are advised to exercise caution when dealing in the shares of the Company.
This announcement is made by Imagi International Holdings Limited (the “Companyâ€) pursuant to Rule 13.09 of the Rules Governing the Listing of Securities on The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited.
The board of directors of the Company (the “Boardâ€) wishes to inform the shareholders of the Company (the “Shareholdersâ€) and potential investors that the audited consolidated loss of the Company and its subsidiaries (the “Groupâ€) for the year ended 31 March 2010 is expected to increase significantly as compared to the loss recorded for the year ended 31 March 2009. The substantial increase in loss is principally due to (i) the unsatisfactory performance of Astro Boy, the Group's feature film launched in October 2009, the revenue from broadcasting the film attributable to the Group could hardly cover the production, promotion and financing costs; and (ii) loss arriving from redemption of bridge loans. Furthermore, with reference to the performance of Astro Boy, it is expected that the results for the year ended 31 March 2010 will include a significant impairment loss on the carrying value of Gatchaman, a feature film in the Group’s pipeline.
As the Company is still in the process of finalising its consolidated financial results for the year ended 31 March 2010, the information contained in this announcement is only based on preliminary assessment of the unaudited management accounts of the Group and the information currently available. Shareholders of the Company and potential investors are advised to read carefully the results announcement of the Company which is expected to be released on 21 July 2010.
* for identification purpose only
Shareholders and potential investors are advised to exercise caution when dealing in the shares of the Company. |
|
James
|
|
|
16-07-2010 03:15
|
|
|
|
|
at how much you're prompt to defend the Condor by all means and at any time!! You're the best of all loyal Condor fans!
