So, I say all that to say is am I wrong for thinking this way meaning, are there some really disturbed individuals that tend to gravitate these types of discussion boards? — Anaxagoras

Without a doubt.
But be careful how far you take that, because it is said that birds of a feather flock together.

For that reason I am very selective about whose posts I read. There are probably no more than a dozen forum members whose writings/thoughts I value (and that, depending on the subject). The rest I pretty much just ignore.

And the only reason I post anything is to see if someone has something of value to contribute to, or challenge, my own thinking. Most of the time, not.

But I do occasionally find great insights in the discussions of others which connect to my own interests.

At what point do interests become personality traits?

At what point do interests become personality traits? — Galuchat

When there is an example of consistency in inconsistent thought as seen in a tangent. Meaning, someone always writing stuff but it seems to be all over the place, and its always when they write. Usually this is merely a byproduct of something psychological going on.

Usually this is merely a byproduct of something psychological going on. — Anaxagoras

I agree.
What is the prognosis for having an interest in, or just being, unfocused?
Are such people already "really disturbed", or inevitably "really disturbed"?

What is the prognosis for having an interest in, or just being, unfocused? — Galuchat

I don't think having an interest in philosophy is the issue, but the issue could arise and inevitably be described by a professional as several things such as bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, thought disorder, or the like but this would have to be determined by a medical and psychiatric doctor to make these determinations. I'm making an observation not just as a clinician, but as someone who is an academic writer.

Are such people already "really disturbed", or inevitably "really disturbed"? — Galuchat

I think the determination of whether someone is currently having a mental breakdown would be determined by psychiatrist/psychologist. In my opinion, I believe it would be circumstantial. If I'm reading something that is hard to follow and the focus of what their writing is seems to go in all directions with no direction, I'd chalk this up as maybe the individual would not have a firm grip on the basics of writing. You must remember when people write like this the subject makes sense to them, everyone else just has to "get it." Where I start to think people are becoming disturb is if a person either repeats a subject multiple times (meaning create several threads regarding the same subject) or constantly creates subjects and constantly bombard the discussion with ideas that do not make sense or whose directions aren't going anywhere.

For example if your discussion is about Tupperware, and it diverts to politics or diverts to something totally opposite I may personally just chalk that up as you being discombobulated, but if you constantly write stuff and then you somehow relate it to Tupperware, and then politics and then religion then I'd probably think something mentally is going on that needs medical/psychiatric intervention.

Thanks for your elaboration.
So you are a clinician, but not a professional? What is the difference?
And, since you've been participating on this forum, approximately what percentage of other members do you think have psychological problems (not necessarily limited to the type you cite in the OP)?

So, I say all that to say is am I wrong for thinking this way meaning, are there some really disturbed individuals that tend to gravitate these types of discussion boards? — Anaxagoras

Your opening post doesn't necessarily describe "really disturbed individuals" - it applies to a much wider range of people who are not skilled at writing and expressing their thoughts, or just don't put much effort into their posts.

If I'm reading something that is hard to follow and the focus of what their writing is seems to go in all directions with no direction, I'd chalk this up as maybe the individual would not have a firm grip on the basics of writing. — Anaxagoras

Yes, exactly.

But as to your question, that has been my observation as well. To put it crudely, a forum with "philosophy" in its title tends to attract the loons in more than average numbers.

Your opening post doesn't necessarily describe "really disturbed individuals — SophistiCat

Well have tangential thoughts are which are consistent with a psychological imbalance a la "thought disorders are considered "disturbed" according to the DSM.

it applies to a much wider range of people who are not skilled at writing and expressing their thoughts, or just don't put much effort into their posts. — SophistiCat

I noticed a couple people who write this it just kinda brought it to my attention.

To put it crudely, a forum with "philosophy" in its title tends to attract the loons in more than average numbers. — SophistiCat

I figured. I believe the same with psychology.

There is also a fair amount of quackery here. Those kind of birds be called ducks.

So you are a clinician, but not a professional? What is the difference? — Galuchat

I do have my doctorate in Clinical psychology but I'm currently not licensed by my state therefore I do not practice. I'm currently a social worker (LCSW-Licensed Clinical Social Worker) although I intend on practicing psychology at a later time (don't ask me why I'm doing things backwards).

I do work professionally as a Social Worker primarily dealing with psychiatric patients who suffer from a host of illnesses at a local hospital in my state. Clinicians are professionals because all clinicians work in non-surgical clinical settings.

And, since you've been participating on this forum, approximately what percentage of other members do you think have psychological problems (not necessarily limited to the type you cite in the OP)? — Galuchat

Well I only experienced two individuals who had tangential style writing which I thought were quite odd. Now, it could be because they didn't have a full grasp of how to correctly construct a cohesive thought in a structured format, but it did seem quite bizarre to me though that it was continuous every time they wrote their thoughts in the threads I was involved in.

There is also a fair amount of quackery here. Those kind of birds be called ducks — Galuchat

Interesting. Well, its okay at least they are getting their thoughts out as opposed to doing something violent and destructive. I appreciate this over destructive behavior.

Cheers!

LOL Whom are you talking about?

I prefer not to say, I don't like to air people out like that therefore, to not single one or two people out I'd like to make it as general as possible.