loving-n0t-heyting:

twocubes:

you know what i’m fine with people going back and psychologically diagnosing historical figures

yes, they’re doing it based on very limited data, but, i’ve never met a psychologist who diagnosed me with even close to as much data as there is available on most historical figures

I remember ppl lecturing one another online about not taking diagnostic tests at home as serious evidence the way they would be if administered competently in “clinical settings” and like. I have seen these clinical settings, friend, they are just office rooms with diplomas on the well

The whole thing has the feeling of a sacrament. Ordinary, natural standards of evidence don’t match up to the knowledge you can acquire thru “clinical” use, bc diagnosis isn’t natural knowledge. It’s supernatural cognition, infused thru the power of sacramental matter by one bear the spiritual character of holy orders. Retroactive historical diagnoses lack this essential context; they’re offensive and irrational the same way as mormon posthumous baptism