Email: med5gl@gmail.com About Us Contact Us Privacy Policy
Books and Novels
If you wish to purchase an ebook of any of the books mentioned, go to our purchase page and follow instructions.
Cost is $US3 for each ebook.
About Psycholegalanalysis
The CMPL is for psychiatrists and clinical psychologists. This scientific study was in Australia. Judges of the High Court of Australia excluded from the study. Read the ‘Introduction’ to understand the scope and limitations of this study. One important summary: the area used by magistrates and judges for legal deliberations, in the temporal lobe of the typical left cerebral hemisphere, is a small inefficient area - perhaps no larger than a golf ball and only loosely connected to other brain areas. Because of this, and the narrow intellectualism of law, and because of neuroplasticity, the typical intellectual capacity of a magistrate or judge will eventually reduce to that of a 12-year-old in order to optimize ‘legal deliberations’. If you can read some affidavits, you may also come to that same conclusion.
Psycholegalanalysis is a by-product of 5GL-Doctor Medical Diagnosis Aid/Expert System computer software. That software is a pattern matching engine which uses mathematics and a pseudo ‘neural network’. Legal research from Australian case studies was used to match patterns - looking for those consistent with different types of brain dysfunction. The software includes a large ‘brain symptoms’ database.
The CMPL is the result of attempting to formalize such observations. The names for the ‘Conclusions’ are chosen as these came to mind. The name is not important. As to what clinical use the Conclusions could be put to, that can only be worked out in a clinical setting.
While specific to a legal background (e.g. police, lawyers, judges or similar), managers and executives in organizations follow “rules”or “guidelines” or “theories” which they may not understand as “law” but which the brain processes in the same way. Law in different countries can differ. The case studies used as input are from Australian legal decisions, however, that is unlikely to make a significant difference.
Example of entry. These are called ‘Conclusions’ instead of ‘diagnosis’.
Magical Thinking
In psychiatry, magical thinking is defined as “Magical thinking defines false beliefs about the capability of thoughts, actions or words to cause or prevent undesirable events. It is a commonly observed symptom in thought disorder, schizotypal personality disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder.”
In CMPL, it refers to thoughts that can result from not having the education or skill to reach an educated opinion or conclusion. Or, when a theory or argument is against the natural perceptions and workings of the human brain as is known by neuroscientists. This may be compared to acceptance of myths and folklore as ‘truth’ or ‘faith’ or a ‘belief system’. It may accompany delusional thinking and/or senile thinking. In psychiatry ‘magical thinking’ is usually associated with a personality disorder.
Is it clinically significant? A person who believes in a specific scientific theory may only be able to do so with the aid of magical thinking – but does this impact the person or relatives or career?
NEVER explain in any way what ‘magical thinking’ is. Each clinician must work this out. In theory, it is the psycholegalanalysis process in your brain (should it form) that will intuitively understand magical thinking. Rational people who want to understand what ‘magical thinking’ is, simply can’t. For this reason there is no ‘rational explanation’ of what that is. The best that can be done are examples. Note that lawyers may use magical thinking often in courts - but that is likely an accepted legal strategy.
Possible Scenarios
“Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.”
Judicial decision: “While the late Ms Jones had Alzheimer’s, the geriatric specialist pronounced her fit to sign a new Will leaving out all daughters except the defendant. The fact that the Will was signed and dated only two days before death is not relevant. The fact that she didn’t know who the defendant was is not relevant. That is the law.”
Newton’s canon ball example that results in astronomers believing the Moon is always falling to Earth. The man was also into alchemy and suggestion of long term exposure to mercury. (See Mad Hatter’s disease). However, his theory of the Moon always falling to Earth may be consistent with his understanding of gravity - but he was centuries away from a better understanding of magnetism and the solar system. The problem is with people who don’t think about why this doesn’t make sense and believe Newton was right about everything. The reason for that belief could be magical thinking.
Einstein’s ‘Relativity theories’ and his famous but meaningless equation. In the latter case, try find a counter argument. A physicist might insist “That equation means mass and energy are interchangeable”. Ask “How can we obtain the same release of energy from 10 kg of coal as from 10 kg nuclear weapon?” However, aspects of astronomy and astrophysics are a belief system and it may be clinically inadvisable (as such could be a ‘vault’) to pursue.
While Einstein may have defined his ‘relativity theories’, he was talking about a stable universe and invariant laws of physics and gravity. Physicists try to explain what he meant by ‘spacetime’ using rational (if lengthy, waffle sometimes) arguments. But it is surely clear from Einstein’s own thoughts that he believed ‘time’ was a ‘dimension’ in its own right that ‘moves’ with an observer. This is how the idea of an Event Horizon around a Black Hole came about - once past it the ‘dimension of time’ begins to reverse.
Gravity laws proved ‘not so invariable’ by measurements of gravity on Earth. Einstein didn’t know about that. That came later as instrumentation improved. But, he didn’t have any confidence in the Big Bang theory or the expanding universe. In his case his theories may have been a delusion resulting from the spatial and ‘logical time areas’ being fused - as reports on the autopsy suggest.
Did he really understand mathematics? Rumors are he failed such. Other rumors claim this is not so. But, looking at his dime dilation equation it is appears he is using ‘time’ as a ‘variable’ - while ‘time’ is a mathematical constant with a precisely defined value and how that value has been derived. ‘Time’ doesn’t ‘dilate’. A time on the clock may be different but that has to do with the environment.
Finding reliable details about an autopsy of Einstein’s brain is tricky. What can be found suggests a small atypical brain with significant multiple divergence from a typical brain. In particular, there is a suggestion that in parts of his left and right parietal lobe there was no demarcation. But, there is a suggestion that to hide deformities in the brain unconventional views (images) were taken of his brain (link). The thinking is that this was intentional to make the brain appear as normal as possible. It was a small brain, about 150 g less than a typical male brain. That is substantially outside the male brain range. Also, after the autopsy his brain was sliced up and ‘disappeared’ - only to surface later and be put together, but parts were never found.
There is a suspicion Einstein may have acquired syphilis in his life and such can affect thinking. Apparently he was quite the ‘ladies man’. Einstein received a Nobel Prize by default. Not for his physics or theories. (Name drawn out of a hat; but some sources suggest otherwise). In fact, Einstein was furious that his ‘relativity theories’ were not the reason. There is much myth about this person with extraordinary claims such as he mastered science at an early age. But, records indicate he was a troubled person in his youth. Didn’t desire the company of those his own age. Some of his teachers thought he was mentally retarded. Expelled from school for uncontrollable behavior. A psychopath? He divorced his wife to marry a cousin which is a red flag. The brain anomalies and the small frontal lobes (how reliable this information is, is uncertain) seem consistent with what is known about psychopaths - but with only one clear red flag what to make of this? The only other indicator might be that he managed in 1919 to persuade a few scientists that his ‘Relativity theories’ were correct from observations of the Moon. That is the kind of genius only psychopaths have. As psychiatrist’s understand, the true genius of a psychopath is to convince others they are what they want to present themselves as. The other red flag is that he managed to sell a meaningless energy equation as some kind of ‘genius’ feat. (‘Energy’ in physics is a generic concept. It has to be related to a particular form of energy to have any significance).
Einstein, long dead, is not a concern. It is those who ‘believe’ his relativity theories. One reason could be magical thinking. There is much credit given to Einstein for physics that were not his (e.g. photons - Planck; photoelectric effect - Hertz). Anything attributed to Einstein can usually be traced to the original discoverer.
Diagnosis Criteria
a) A judicial decision that makes no sense to those who know the person about whom the decision was made.
This is how in Australia (NSW case study) scams work to do with the estate left by a deceased brain damaged person. At first, while the deceased is alive, an apprehended violence order (AVO) is sought against whoever is the carer – and sometimes against all family members. These are automatically granted. These threaten people with jail if they come near a ‘protected person’. No evidence is required. None. A court is asked to approve a nominated carer, sometimes a stranger, because lawyers claim the brain damaged person had asked for this and a medical doctor is a witness. The medical doctor claims John has ‘capacity to make that decision’. The ‘capacity to make a decision’ is not a valid medical diagnosis, but that doesn’t stop some doctors making such for legal firms and putting in writing. Each week in the NSW Supreme Court in matters of Last Will and Testament, you may find scam after scam even this “While the deceased had 90% brain damage, nevertheless in the opinion of our expert medical team he had the capacity to name our client as the sole beneficiary.” (Note: over the years various NSW governments had made a number of attempts to stop these scams by rewording the law. No good. Always negated by courts using legal precedents to destroy the intent.)
b) The idea that a particular action can control something unrelated.
OR
a) Accepting the opinion of one or more person(s) as 100% correct, regardless of qualifications or experience, in a situation in which there is no correct or absolute answer.