Saturday, Nov 26th

Last update:08:21:32 PM GMT

You are here: Christian Doctrine Health 'Psychoticism':- Real or invented?

'Psychoticism':- Real or invented?

E-mail Print PDF

As part of a constant struggle to find reasons to maintain its own existence, psychiatry invents new ‘conditions’, expands on ‘conditions’ already known, and uses ‘conditions’ to attack Christians. One of these ‘conditions’ is ‘psychoticism’. Does it really exist?

In any sphere of study there comes the first idea. This is followed by further studies to ‘prove’ (rather than to disprove) the truth of the first study. This is against the scientific method of falsification, which examines findings in an unbiased way to reach the true conclusion, either way. What we now see are studies that have no real scientific or medical basis, but backed by numerous studies that ‘prove’ what has not been proved to be legitimate in the first place! This is what has happened in the ‘study’ of homosexuality. Current studies are PC; they set out to prove that homosexuality is ‘natural’... but they do so by ignoring a hundred years of genuine studies that say the exact opposite, and present-day studies that oppose the liberal hypothesis.

Connected to this unscientific and liberal approach to science and medicine, is the notion of ‘psychoticism’. It is now being used to attack or to belittle Christians and biblical standards. It is a simple fact that science can very easily devise studies that are unscientific and yet used to damage others. They can do it and get away with it for two main reasons – the general public have no idea how to discern truth from lies, when they are presented by an ‘authority’, and, science and medicine are now ‘PC’, so they follow a trend rather than the truth.

Another fact emerges, too – that once a fake set of ideas are listed as ‘science’ or ‘medicine’, just about ALL experts in those fields read the same lies and deceptions, and do not bother to do their own research to verify the truth or not of the studies that are being used to persuade them! In this way there arises a very large number of ‘expert’ followers, none of whom have checked anything for themselves.

I was in the thick of studying the then new AIDS phenomenon. As I read EVERY article to come out of the scientific and medical folds, I saw that EVERY doctor in the country was being given the SAME core papers, ALL of which defended homosexuality and removed blame for AIDS from their doorstep. Very quickly, all doctors were quoting these fake sources, and in this way the medical profession adopted the pro-homosexual mantra very quickly. This was to the detriment of all people throughout the world, as they were told ‘anyone’ could get AIDS. Not so! At that time just a hundred or so men were shown to have full AIDS (which was not then named as such), but I warned that if the truth was not made known (that homosexuals alone were responsible for AIDS), millions would die of the disease. And this is in fact what happened.

After my warning the government stopped sending me daily reports of the disease and I was sacked from my college teaching job. This is what happens when anyone questions what is being pushed out as propaganda! And this should be remembered when reading about supposed ‘conditions’ in the mental health field.

In the past I opposed the very idea of psychiatry, because it was rooted in far eastern myths, occultism, and unscientific proposals. I looked again at such hypotheses (they are nothing more) as manic depression (now labelled bi-polar), arguing that it was not a condition as such but merely a radical refusal to be responsible. It might be triggered by anxiety, but it was NOT a ‘condition’. This led to an overall study of all conditions known at that time, and to my own rejection of psychiatry as a whole. It is with this background that I now question the very idea of ‘psychoticism’ as a label. To put it bluntly, we would be much better off simply saying about a person with these ‘symptoms’ “A nasty bit of work”! We do not need a psychiatrist to advise us when someone is nasty or aggressive, etc.

Eysenck Is Not Ruler!

The term ‘psychoticism’ goes back to psychologist Hans Eysenck, a known psychologist in psychiatric circles. The category is one of three grouped together by Eysenck and labelled ‘P-E-N’; this stands for psychoticism, extraversion, and neuroticism, all his ideas as to features of personality. The person whose personality is marked by ‘psychoticism’ is typically aggressive, with anger towards other persons on a constant basis. Police come across such people every day and night, especially when the people are drunk or drug-filled.

It is important to note that these were Eysenck’s ideas, and they do not necessarily find agreement from all in psychiatry. Indeed, when it comes to so-called ‘psychoticism’, I question the need to use a category at all. But, psychiatry can only survive if it keeps re-inventing itself and adding to mental categories.

There is also a fact not generally understood, even in psychiatry – that personality can change. As a student psychiatric nurse I remember a large poster on one of the ‘neuroses’ wards in my hospital. It asserted that personality does not change, unless the person becomes psychotic. My objection to that claim is that many Christians, whose character was dubious or bad beforehand leading to a sinful personality, can change dramatically as the Holy Spirit teaches them holiness and God’s demands.

At the same time as saying this, it was said that a real Christian ‘must be’ psychologically unbalanced. Put the two claims together and it is easy to see why some tend to see Christians as psychotic or seriously mentally flawed. Hence, in the minds of psychiatrists – all of whom were unbelievers - Christians were susceptible to schizophrenia and other psychoses! What nonsense!


Eysenck said that blood relatives of someone who displayed psychoticism were highly likely to be of the same personality, suggesting that the trait was genetic. But, this is an unscientific way to look at it – it is far more likely that the person is affected by psychoticism he has witnessed in his family members. That is, his psychoticism is not genetic, but learned behaviour, just as Pavlov’s dogs learned how to react to situations after lengthy ‘brainwashing’. Those who live closely together, such as a family, are bound to display familial traits, each learning from the other. We also see this in criminal families and families that take drugs. It is not genetic at all.

Anyone who has lived on a poor housing estate will have witnessed these people, whose entire families are anti-social, hateful of others, violent, prone to dislike strangers, dislike authority, work and peace. They learn from each other and live petty and nasty lives. This is nothing to do with genetics, but with people allowed to do whatever they like without proper discipline. We even see this kind of evil in Islamic terrorists – they teach each other to be violent and hateful. Indeed, they fall into this invented category of ‘psychoticism’. The biblical name for all this is simple but true – wickedness, the end-result of sin.

There are also people who have an adverse reaction to situations in life, particularly children of divorced parents, for example. Some will adopt the traits of bipolar syndrome, because they are unable to get through their depression or anxiety of watching their parents angry towards each other. Bipolar is an excellent way to throw aside all responsibility and to do anything you wish! The more extreme the better, because psychiatry will foster the idea it is ‘mental illness’. This is (more or less) where BPD enters the scene, too (see article on this – Borderline Personality Disorder... a supposed ‘condition’ that is currently ‘flavour of the month’.

I would remind readers of the observation by Russian dissident Alexander Solzhenitsyn in his famed Gulag series of books. He saw how the repressive Russian government managed to criminalise or ‘psychiatrise’ huge numbers of people (in their many thousands) simply by inventing new categories of mental illness or criminal types, who could then be incarcerated because they were seen as a threat to communism. As he once said, all you need to criminalise people with red hair is to invent a new label... suddenly, a whole group of people will be sent to prison on the basis of a new category – red hair! This is exactly what is now happening to Christians!

Broadening the Traits

Once a new category has been invented, practitioners will expand on it by filling in the details of its supposed presence. And so a single-line title is suddenly surrounded by many details, all attached because the practitioners say so! Thus, many who supposedly have ‘psychoticism’ are also said to be impulsive and sensation-seeking, unthinking, risk-taking, never planning, etc. This fits many of those troublesome families I referred to above! In each and every case, lack of strict discipline allows these people to literally ‘run riot’, doing whatever they wish to do. In this way, their ‘personality’ is decided not by any inner traits, but by the initial lack of discipline, and disinterest from police and courts.

This kind of person is most likely to be violently psychopathic (there are other categories within psychoticism) – another label, but useful in this case, because it describes (generally) people who have no regard for others and do whatever comes to mind, whether it harms or not. It does not matter what the label says, though: the person described is simply wicked. The longer they go unchecked the stronger becomes their selfishness and hate for authority, etc. It is their unsaved wickedness that drives them and creates their personality. They are moulded by their own activities and thoughts, which are never criticised or stopped short.

But, that personality can change, even in a fully-fledged psychopath... if he is already elect. However, this kind of extreme behaviour is often the sign of a person whose godlessness is itself extreme, and is why God condemns such strongly, without sympathy. They have become unfit for this world and God deals with it strictly.

As I said in my article on BPD, when a person is allowed to get away with anti-social behaviour and is not stopped immediately it occurs first time, the person simply carries on, adding more nasty ‘symptoms’ until he is virtually untouched by criticism or help, and only wishes to harm others for fun, or for hatred. Thus, the BPD person and the person displaying ‘psychoticism’ are so because they have never been met with the brick wall of censure. In this way society helps them to be as they are, by never restraining their wicked acts and speech.

Every person, except those with brain trauma of some kind, is capable of self-restraint. As adults these people ignore self-restraint because they enjoy their sin too much. And they are allowed to get away with it – give them a psychiatric category and they finally have official approval of their personality and actions! A man who is called schizophrenic, and who kills, CAN stop himself. It is argued that he might not understand that killing is wrong. This is not the issue! He KNOWS that society as a whole deplores murder and that the law condemns it. So, he cannot get away with it by hiding behind psychiatric labels.

It is often said that psychopaths know they are doing wrong, but have no idea how to control themselves and, anyway, they do not wish to, because they have ‘numb’ consciences. Again, this is not an excuse. They KNOW the rules of society and law, but ignore it, because they know they will get away with it once they have a psychiatric category against their name. This is how those with traits of ‘psychoticism’ get away with it – people tread lightly around them just in case they ‘explode’, and when they do, they are let off the consequences because it is ‘part of their character’. In this way, psychiatry hinders progress and provides a safe-haven for people whose personalities are the result of their wickedness.

It therefore stands that the task of the Christian is firstly to condemn what these people do, because it is sin. A warning to change and repent is necessary before any change of personality can be achieved. As I have said in my article on BDS, I am in favour of any mind control method that reduces or eliminates such anti-social behaviour and personality traits, even if the persons do not become saved. This is because society should never allow anti-social people to control them or to make their lives a misery! The people affected should not be ruled by those who show hatred or antisocial behaviour. Any underlying ‘causes’ in adults are not an excuse to allow it to occur. They MUST be held accountable.

It is said (by some, but not all) that possible ‘causes’ are low levels of dopamine, or some other chemical in the brain. To be frank, I say “So what?” I had high blood pressure for some time before it was recognised. Some with high blood pressure will lose their temper easily. But, it is an error to say that the HBP caused the loss of temper. Similarly, pain cannot ‘cause’ loss of temper. The cause is one’s own rejection of self-control. Few brain conditions (usually from accidents, etc.) result in genuine inability to control one’s temper. But, even then, the person must learn to recognise when anger arises, and must learn how to cope with it. (Note that these comments are generalised; I recognise that there are a few circumstances where loss of temper is due to several factors arising at once that are outside the control of the angry person. Even then, though, when the initial ‘shock’ has gone the person must quickly resume control over temper, etc.).

Marxist/Fascist Abuse of Ideas

Theories of personality never give a reason to pass-over personality traits that harm others. They must be censured and stopped, ‘nipped in the bud’. Otherwise they get worse and worse, hardening sin into a wickedness. This especially applies to Christians of course, whose personality must be a reflection of Christ’s mind.

The idea of ‘psychoticism’ is being raised yet again today, as a reason for atheists and other God-haters to despise and control Christians. Continually, these haters try to find new ways to eliminate or marginalise believers... the greater the sins of society as a whole, the worse this oppression and hatred becomes. The idea that Christians are showing signs of ‘psychoticism’ is specifically used for believers who disagree with the legal status of homosexuals.

Homosexuals, of course, claim that ‘everyone’ now accepts them. This is untrue and unjustified in any data, but it is used to accuse Christians of being unique, isolated, and suffering from a bad personality. This set of traits must be treated psychiatrically or in the prison system, because “homophobia is obviously a mental imbalance”. Obviously? Those who have strictly studied notions of homosexuality tend to be serious individuals with higher education and solid arguments. The personal identity of these Christians does not fit the theoretical signs of ‘psychoticism’... but this is where ‘Confirmation Bias’ enters the picture, where those who truly hate others use fake arguments to support their flimsy, if not non-existent, case. The truth, then, is that those who have traits of ‘psychoticism’ are just nasty individuals who cannot be bothered to control their tempers.

See article on ‘Confirmation Bias’, which is now rife everywhere, even amongst Christians.

© November 2015

Published on

Bible Theology Ministries - PO Box 415, Swansea, SA5 8YH
United Kingdom