Crap The Joker (Scouse and Toht "discussion", best stay away unless you're a bit insane :p)

[Scouse]

Wow...what a great rebuttal. Especially when talking about a comic supervillain.

You used the fact that a man, Grant Morrison, argued that the joker was "super sane" as a supporting argument. I say he talks a lot of shit - and backed it up with evidence.

That is a great rebuttal.

 

[Scouse]

So you still claim that ALL psychopaths are mad?

Yes. In the very post before you posted this again.

Psychopath = mad.

Period.



Why ask the question, yet again, with your very next post?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Not really, since the occultism has nothing to do with discussions of comics.

Yes. In the very post before you posted this again.

Why ask the question in the very next thread?

Well then you're simply wrong. All psychopaths aren't mad, even by definition, of which there is no clear one cut definition of.

Now, can you discuss the actual topic?

 

[Scouse]

Not really, since the occultism has nothing to do with discussions of comics.

You're a giant dick Toht.

Occultism shows he talks and believes in a lot of shit...

...but you already understand the point I've made and you're back to trolling.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Ok then, nice of you to stop by.

Maybe now we can actually discuss this.

 

[TdC]

Where you people get the energy to keep this up I'll never know 0o

 

[gohan]

There are multiple definitions of what constitues psychopathic behaviours - all of which fall under the definition of the term "mad".

Not sure about that, I exhibit some Phychopathic behaviors, detatchment, lack of empathy etc and I'm fairly sure I'm pretty sane.

Maybe I'm not who knows?

Again I also have some autisitc traits, like rainman style memory and ability to learn without studying or revising.

I guess everyone has the potential to be mad, it's just what you do with those traits that defines you, not the traits themselves......

 

[old.Tohtori]

Where you people get the energy to keep this up I'll never know 0o

Well i did troll for 4-5 years straight every day

I must be psychotic, not amd though, just psychotic

 

[gohan]

Well i did troll for 4-5 years straight every day

I must be psychotic, not amd though, just psychotic

athlon?

 

[old.Tohtori]

I think with the Joker you have to look at the charasteristics, motives and all that to define if he's mad or not. Psychopath? Yes. Crazy? At times(not in the looniebin way, behaviour). Psychotic? Very much so, when his personality feels like it.

Overall he's a very in control, very complex, fearless non caring individual, but calling him mad would imply that there's a level of lack of control, which nothing seems to indicate.

athlon?

Radeon.

 

[DaGaffer]

According to mental health experts, Toht wins the internet for today.

 

[Scouse]

if you are aware that you're mad are you still mad??? Generally madness and selfawareness don't go hand it hand.

Not true.

Psychopaths can well know that they're psychopathic. Once diagnosed it is easily pointed out to them and very easily understood.

They just don't care - because they suffer from a mental illness.


I wish I had the link to the BBC program on mental illness where a Doctor - medical doctor - explains that he had been diagnosed as psychopathic, understands that he's psychopathic, but just doesn't care - because the mental illness that means he is psychopathic means that he can't care.

He's aware of his own madness. He's still practicing as a medical doctor. He's mad.


The "movie" definition of mental illness rarely applies in real life...

 

[old.Tohtori]

Seems i was wrong about the psychotic part then. Nice article

The "movie" definition of mental illness rarely applies in real life...

Oh sorry, i'm so sorry, i thought you knew batman isn't real.

 

[gohan]

I don't agree that mental illness = mad though....

Their are so many mental illnesses many of which don't even really effect people.

To me mad would be unhinged, unpredictable, possibly dangerous and mainly, unable to control their actions and impulses.....

The doctor you mentioned isn't mad..... he knows what he's doing and is in full control. I guess tohts argument is the same with the joker..... but I disagree there as well because just because you don't have the ability to care doesn't automatically make you need to be a cunt... very few phychopaths are violent, but those that are I would say are mad, as they are compelled to do these things..... they don't have controll, if they did why would you logically chose to kill some one if they were no threat and you stood to gain nothing?


you wouldn't.

 

[gohan]

I don't agree that mental illness = mad though....

Their are so many mental illnesses many of which don't even really effect people.

To me mad would be unhinged, unpredictable, possibly dangerous and mainly, unable to control their actions and impulses.....

The doctor you mentioned isn't mad..... he knows what he's doing and is in full control. I guess tohts argument is the same with the joker..... but I disagree there as well because just because you don't have the ability to care doesn't automatically make you need to be a cunt... very few phychopaths are violent, but those that are I would say are mad, as they are compelled to do these things..... they don't have controll, if they did why would you logically chose to kill some one if they were no threat and you stood to gain nothing?


you wouldn't.

just reas that article and this sums up what i'm saying

Bender says psychopathy is a personality construct and not a diagnosis of a mental disorder.

So I guess even my your definition psychopaths aren't mad as it's not a mental disorder

 

[Scouse]

The doctor you mentioned isn't mad..... those that are I would say are mad, as they are compelled to do these things..... they don't have controll, if they did why would you logically chose to kill some one if they were no threat and you stood to gain nothing?


you wouldn't.

The explanation given by the doctor was the one of nurture over nature.

Look at it this way:

You've got a mental disability. You can brain-scan for psychopathy. It's a physical mental disorder, that when combined with the wrong upbringing makes monsters out of people.

In the doctor's case he was brought up in a loving family environment, good friends, well paid job etc.

He exhibits psychopathic tendencies, especially under stress, but they're mild.

However, his postion is that if he'd been brought up in a violent home, bad friends, drug use etc. etc. - then he can see no reason why he wouldn't kill and maim.



The joker is just this doctor brought up with a violent past...

 

[gohan]

but that's no different from people that are just criminals. Not criminally insane.....

People brought up in good homes don't turn bad for no reason, likewise people brought up around gang mentality will almost always get themselves into that same trouble. That has nothing to do with mental illness

 

[old.Tohtori]

The doctor you mentioned isn't mad..... he knows what he's doing and is in full control. I guess tohts argument is the same with the joker..... but I disagree there as well because just because you don't have the ability to care doesn't automatically make you need to be a cunt... very few phychopaths are violent, but those that are I would say are mad, as they are compelled to do these things..... they don't have controll, if they did why would you logically chose to kill some one if they were no threat and you stood to gain nothing?

you wouldn't.

I think in the Jokers case there is a gain though, even if it is a bit off since it's for fun and enjoyment, but he's in control of it still because otherwise he'd kill anyone on a whim, where as his kills, while sometimes irrational, are usually decided kills. He's actually on occasions been about to shoot someone, then thought of a joke instead, or simply didn't. So even in the irrational actions, there's still full control.

The joker is just this doctor brought up with a violent past...

That's an interesting point to bring to your argument, when the Joker has no defined past.

 

[Scouse]

That's an interesting point to bring to your argument, when the Joker has no defined past.

In the film he's scarred to fuckkery on his face. It's safe to assume that it's likely that his past wasn't a great one - or that he's into self-harm...

 

[old.Tohtori]

In the film he's scarred to fuckkery on his face. It's safe to assume that it's likely that his past wasn't a great one - or that he's into self-harm...

Well let's just take away that you base your knowledge on that matter of Joker on the nolan version alone, even in that t's still never clear what happened. Claiming he has a violent past is just not true. Could be just as "true" that he made the scars after he became the joker.

Why he is how he is, source of his quirks and deformations and his overall past before being the Joker(family or otherwise) is simply non-existant at this moment.

 

[Billargh]

I think you'd have to be both mad and psychotic to participate in this thread.



Oh shit.

 

[Scouse]

Well let's just take away that you base your knowledge on that matter of Joker on the nolan version alone.

Not true. Dreddy and Batman fan. Have been for years.

Thought we were talking primarily about the film tho. If we're opening it out to the comics then it's a wasted discussion as there's a bazillion interpretations...

 

[old.Tohtori]

You were perhaps, i was talking about the joker, not nolajoker...nolaker?

It's not a waste of discussion either, there's still established lines that are quite clear.

But as said, even in nolanverse you're still wrong

 

[Scouse]

But as said, even in nolanverse you're still wrong

Really? So, it's not safe to assume that he's either had a violent past or self harms?

How the fuck does he get the scars then? He either gets given them, or gives himself them.


Automatic naysaying of any idea is not a discussion Toht.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Automatic naysaying of any idea is not a discussion Toht.

Hmm, naysaying eh? I guess the whole..."...it's still never clear what happened. Claiming he has a violent past is just not true. Could be just as "true" that he made the scars after he became the joker." is nothing. Go figure!

A: You do not know anything about the joker before he was the joker.
B: The scars could be his own doing, but if he did them as the joker it doesn't count as his "past" anyway. None of that is know as the true nature of the scars isn't told.
C: You were talking about upbringing in the doctors case and then related the joker into it, implying that he had a violent upbringing or otherwise dramatic life.

All baseless speculation with no backing up.

Oh look, it IS easy as ABC!

 

[Scouse]

So, he self-harms then.

It IS safe to assume either he was the subject of violence or he self harms.


Good. Now we're getting somewhere.

As to "before he was the joker". It doesn't matter what someone calls themselves - they're still the same human being. If he self-harmed ten years ago, or he self-harmed the day he painted his face white, he still self-harms....

All baseless speculation

No, not baseless speculation. Logical inference. He either did it to himself, or someone did it to him.


If it's not self-harm, then it's a violent past. Period.

 

[old.Tohtori]

No the point is that you don't know. No one does. If it was done as the joker, then self-harm is just a charasteristic of him(he's laughed about getting shot for example, thinking it's a good joke). It might be a frag granade, it might be a really angry beaver, the fact is that there is absolutely no proof either way.

As joker, he OFCOURSE has lived a violent life, it's the f*cking Joker

You claimed that a violent past made him as he is, the Joker, unlike what the doctor was in your example, so you meant as clear as day that you think the scars are from before, WHICH we know nothing about.

Another point Toht, thank you, now did you dig yourself in a deep enough hole yet or should you just accept a loss?

 

[gohan]

could of been a car crash, or he could of got tevezed xD jusayin

 

[old.Tohtori]

could of been a car crash, or he could of got tevezed xD jusayin

Good points both, or in a more "why so serious" way, he could've done the scars as a plan to f*ck with batman

 

[Scouse]

could of been a car crash, or he could of got tevezed xD jusayin

Leaving tevezed aside (kettles don't give you a chelsea smile) it *could* have been a car crash - but again, highly unlikely.

They've very specific scars. I say it's safe to assume that he either did it to himself or someone did it to him.


Question I'd like answered: Do you and toht honestly think that it's against the balance of probabilities that he's a self harmer or has a violent past?

he could've done the scars as a plan to f*ck with batman

Which would make him a self-harmer....