[av_one_full first min_height=” vertical_alignment=” space=” custom_margin=” margin=’0px’ padding=’0px’ border=” border_color=” radius=’0px’ background_color=” src=” background_position=’top left’ background_repeat=’no-repeat’ animation=”]
[av_heading heading=’Obsessive-compulsive personality constitution’ tag=’h3′ style=’blockquote modern-quote’ size=” subheading_active=’subheading_below’ subheading_size=’15’ padding=’10’ color=” custom_font=”]
BY OSCAR CRUZ
[/av_heading]
[av_textblock size=” font_color=’custom’ color=’#0a0a0a’]
Friday, January 27, 2017
[/av_textblock]
[av_textblock size=” font_color=’custom’ color=’#0a0a0a’]
TIME and again, people repeatedly see and hear about this or that famous or infamous personality – lovable or despicable, pleasing or disgusting individual. And time and again as well, those concerned express their standard admiration for the former and usual disdain for the latter.
So it is that the question is not what is right with the former but rather what is wrong with the latter – their thinking and reacting process, their action and behavior pattern.
When people think and/or speak about said individuals, it would be prudent not to simply pass judgment on them such as whether they are lovable or obnoxious, virtuous or vicious individuals. In other words, it is much better for people to be prudent in their depreciation about such individuals – considering that they can be such not really because they are bad but on account of their unsound personality constitution.
The word “disorder” appended to one’s personality constitution already forwards the latter’s complexity. But then, the reality becomes even more complicated when its qualifying psychiatric nomenclature has a two-fold indicative or descriptive appendage, viz., not only “obsessive” but also “compulsive”, i.e., when something becomes an internal fixation to him/her but also when the same thing is also an interior coercion to the same individual.
In fact, this is the only “disorder” that has a double-title nomenclature. There is obsession on one hand and there is compulsion on the other hand – with reference to the same individual. Someone, however, can be qualified as both “obsessive” and “compulsive” at the same time. In other words, although it can happen that someone is fixated towards something, to be hereto also deluded is a complex inducement.
Standard dictionaries say the following: Obsession in essence is the same as fixation, mania, quirk.
On the other hand, compulsion, in substance means duress, coercion, urging. What is the difference – if any?
One, obsession seems to come from within while compulsion appears to originate from without.
Two, obsession appears to apply to someone driven while compulsion seems to drive someone to do something.
Three, obsession applies to someone controlled while compulsion makes somebody confused and confusing – to the perplexity and wonder of others around him/her.
Professionally, someone is considered “obsessive” when the same is disturbed or bothered by repeated and insistent thought, feeling or sensation.
On the other hand, somebody is held as “compulsive” when the latter shows a repeated or recurrent conscious action and/or behavior. Wherefore, the common denominator of the thus doubly qualified “disorder” is repetition that is beyond the normal, the standard.
As usual, the real victim of the malady is the individual himself/herself concerned. Others might find him/her curious or queer, irritating or disgusting. But at the end, it is someone with an “obsessive compulsive personality” constitution who is the loser./PN
[/av_textblock]
[/av_one_full]
