Was Doran smart or did he just wasted a oportunity?

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

28 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Please provide the source.

Benjamin, Sadock; Virginia, Sadock; Pedro, Ruiz (2017). Kaplan and Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry (2 Volume Set) (10th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

[sweetsunray]

1 minute ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

Benjamin, Sadock; Virginia, Sadock; Pedro, Ruiz (2017). Kaplan and Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry (2 Volume Set) (10th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

I think the source of that cited sentence is actually the wikipedia, no? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy . In a way that wiki author sentence itself goes against wiki guidelines. It is the wiki author who refers to it as "highly subjective", which is basically his own opinion.

And it reads as an overgeneralized interpretation from a wiki-author rather than a quote from Sadock, Sadock and Ruiz.

Furthermore, the exaggerated generalized criticism by the wiki author stems mostly from certain criticism on Hare's PCL (which has been revized).

The "criticism" section on the wiki page about psychopathy, quotes Dorothy Otnow Lewis, as having criticised Hare's PCL-R checklist, and her claims in that criticism are left without review. She claims for example that Hare claims psychopaths can be diagnozed purely based on their criminal files and without a personal interview. This is an outright lie, for Hare claims the opposite. Dorothy Otnow Lewis's expertise is on Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), what used to be called Multiple Personalty Disorder, which is a disorder that is far more under scrutiny than psychopathy. She compartmentalizes disorders or causes and misrepresents the checklist. Her high profile case testimony in trials leans to giving one individual various diagnosis simultaneously (comorbidity). Her own research is based on small samples without a control group. And in the Shawcross case her comorbid diagnosis and "expert" evidence was partially based on hypnosis.

Basically we can throw Dorothy Otnow Lewis' criticism in the bin, and that includes her claim that "half of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist consists of symptoms of mania, hypomania, and frontal-lobe dysfunction, which frequently results in underlying disorders being dismissed"

I don't know enough about Dr. Martens, but this article sort of made me puke (https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/hidden-suffering-psychopath). It sounds like Dr. Martens fell for the pity party of psychopaths, in which they excel. Most of their victims usually are deeply loving individuals trying to provide stability, love, understanding,etc... And it misrepresents the diagnosis, using a straw man (popular misconception) to knock down a serious effort. That said, yes, there is a risk of misusing the checklist and labeling people. But let's just say that psychopaths do not lack feeling sorry for themselves or self-empathy. They lack it for other people.

The criticism section then uses findings of those diagnosed with ASPD and DID not lacking regret, but well, psychopathy is much narrower defined than ASPD and DID is questionable.

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

4 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

I think the source of that cited sentence is actually the wikipedia, no? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy . In a way that wiki author sentence itself goes against wiki guidelines. It is the wiki author who refers to it as "highly subjective", which is basically his own opinion.

And it reads as an overgeneralized interpretation from a wiki-author rather than a quote from Sadock, Sadock and Ruiz.

Furthermore, the exaggerated generalized criticism by the wiki author stems mostly from certain criticism on Hare's PCL (which has been revized).

The "criticism" section on the wiki page about psychopathy, quotes Dorothy Otnow Lewis, as having criticised Hare's PCL-R checklist, and her claims in that criticism are left without review. She claims for example that Hare claims psychopaths can be diagnozed purely based on their criminal files and without a personal interview. This is an outright lie, for Hare claims the opposite. Dorothy Otnow Lewis's expertise is on Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), what used to be called Multiple Personalty Disorder, which is a disorder that is far more under scrutiny than psychopathy. She compartmentalizes disorders or causes and misrepresents the checklist. Her high profile case testimony in trials leans to giving one individual various diagnosis simultaneously (comorbidity). Her own research is based on small samples without a control group. And in the Shawcross case her comorbid diagnosis and "expert" evidence was partially based on hypnosis.

Basically we can throw Dorothy Otnow Lewis' criticism in the bin, and that includes her claim that "half of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist consists of symptoms of mania, hypomania, and frontal-lobe dysfunction, which frequently results in underlying disorders being dismissed"

I don't know enough about Dr. Martens, but this article sort of made me puke (https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/hidden-suffering-psychopath). It sounds like Dr. Martens fell for the pity party of psychopaths, in which they excel. Most of their victims usually are deeply loving individuals trying to provide stability, love, understanding,etc... And it misrepresents the diagnosis, using a straw man (popular misconception) to knock down a serious effort. That said, yes, there is a risk of misusing the checklist and labeling people. But let's just say that psychopaths do not lack feeling sorry for themselves or self-empathy. They lack it for other people.

The criticism section then uses findings of those diagnosed with ASPD and DID not lacking regret, but well, psychopathy is much narrower defined than ASPD and DID is questionable.

Honestly, @sweetsunray, you are right. I was wrong. Psychopathy is clearly well understood. I was wrong. I still think users on this site are not psychiatrists or having their doctorates in psychology, and I do not think they can properly diagnose anyone. It's just peoples opinions. Do you have your degree in Psychology? You are right and I was wrong about the definition of "psychopathy". I probably had the wrong idea from some media or other. However, it doesn't really change my points at all. It is just semantics, and I really want to move on from this. I used antisocial personality disorder instead of psychopathy, but we are talking about the same thing. Can we move on from this?

 

Edited October 12, 2023 by Lord of Raventree Hall

[sweetsunray]

10 minutes ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

Honestly, @sweetsunray, you are right. I was wrong. Psychopathy is clearly well understood. I was wrong. I still think users on this site are not psychiatrists or having their doctorates in psychology, and I do not think they can properly diagnose anyone. It's just peoples opinions. Do you have your degree in Psychology? You are right and I was wrong about the definition of "psychopathy". I probably had the wrong idea from some media or other. However, it doesn't really change my points at all. It is just semantics, and I really want to move on from this. I used antisocial personality disorder instead of psychopathy, but we are talking about the same thing. Can we move on from this?

I'm a layman with personal experience which took several years of trauma impact recovery, including delving deeply into the material that's out there. Although in a way, since then I simply cannot deal with stress anymore the same way as I used to before the relationshit (no typo).

Since I knew his family and background - caring divorced parents who tried to both instill norms as well as provide emotionally and materially, siblings and cousins ok, middle class - I can only come to the conclusion it wasn't "nurture".

Edited October 12, 2023 by sweetsunray

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

3 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

I'm a layman with personal experience which took several years of trauma impact recovery, including delving deeply into the material that's out there. Although in a way, since then I simply cannot deal with stress anymore the same way as I used to before the relationshit (no typo)

I am sorry for your experience and sorry that I misunderstood the proper terms for psychopathy/APD

[sweetsunray]

Just now, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

I am sorry for your experience and sorry that I misunderstood the proper terms for psychopathy/APD

It's ok. We learn from experiences and it's an honest mistake to make

[BlackLightning]

On 10/12/2023 at 2:56 AM, Arthur Peres said:

I don't think that it would go well. Jorah still reported to Robert at that point, if anyone from the Martells makes a public visit there it would be no diferent than  declaring open rebbelion. Even if Jorah fails to report, Viserys would be for sure dumb enough to make it public knowloge.

Well of course, I'm not saying that they show up for the wedding carrying Martell banners and screaming "We are here to celebrate and commemorate this union on behalf of all of Dorne!"

Quentyn traveled to Meereen bearing a false name under falser pretenses and asked for a private audience. Barristan (and to a lesser extent, Belwas) did the same. There's no reason why any of the Martells or any other anti-Lannister, anti-Baratheon Dornishman couldn't do something similar at the wedding. Or in Vaes Dothrak. Or Qarth.

Jorah would also have to be stupid to expose the Martells like that. Even if he was so stupid, Varys wouldn't be. He'd take it as an invitation to actively include the Martells in his masterplan for the realm...and doing so would definitely speed up the process.

Edited October 30, 2023 by BlackLightning

[Arthur Peres]

On 10/12/2023 at 4:42 PM, BlackLightning said:

Well of course, I'm not saying that they show up for the wedding carrying Martell banners and screaming "We are here to celebrate and commemorate this union on behalf of all of Dorne!"

Quentyn traveled to Meereen bearing a false name under falser pretenses and asked for a private audience. Barristan (and to a lesser extent, Belwas) did the same. There's no reason why any of the Martells or any other anti-Lannister, anti-Baratheon Dornishman couldn't do something similar at the wedding. Or in Vaes Dothrak. Or Qarth.

Jorah would also have to be an stupid to the Martells like that. Even if he was so stupid, Varys wouldn't be. He'd take it as an invitation to actively include them in his masterplan for the realm...and doing so would definitely speed up the process.

Viserys would for sure be dumb enough to turn that into public information. Daenerys herself tell us that.

 

[sweetsunray]

On 10/12/2023 at 9:42 PM, BlackLightning said:

Varys wouldn't be. He'd take it as an invitation to actively include them in his masterplan for the realm...and doing so would definitely speed up the process.

Not really. Not if the Dothraki and Viserys originally were meant to create chaos and destabilize Westeros for Aegon to swoop in and save the day. It just turned out that Westeros didn't need a Dothraki horde or a villainous Viserys to plummet into chaos.

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

Not if the Dothraki and Viserys originally were meant to create chaos and destabilize Westeros for Aegon to swoop in and save the day.

But would the Golden Company be powerful enough to defeat the Dothraki? Or were they counting on support from Westerosi lords?

[sweetsunray]

48 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

But would the Golden Company be powerful enough to defeat the Dothraki? Or were they counting on support from Westerosi lords?

Chaos and division was always aimed at creating support from Westerosi lords.

In JonCon's chapter with the GC though we learn the GC was to meet up with the Dothraki, suggesting a united invasion. But Viserys was always supposed to be a patsy for Aegon, the man to lend more credence to the claim that Aegon is Rhaegar's son. If Doran had wed Arianne to the patsy Viserys, she would have been wed to an abuser who likely feels as much disdain for Dorne as he does for Dothraki, and end up in the thick of it when Aegon and Viserys end up fighting one another.

 

[BlackLightning]

On 10/15/2023 at 3:56 AM, sweetsunray said:

Not really. Not if the Dothraki and Viserys originally were meant to create chaos and destabilize Westeros for Aegon to swoop in and save the day. It just turned out that Westeros didn't need a Dothraki horde or a villainous Viserys to plummet into chaos.

I don't think Viserys and the Dothraki alone were meant to create chaos and destabilize Westeros just to enable Aegon and the Golden Company to be seen as heroes.

If that was the plan, it'd be a stupid and very risky plan...and I feel Varys is too careful.

Why? My reasoning is that no one of import is going to want Aegon and his Targaryen successors in charge after everything is said and done. The realm already suffered immensely from the actions of Aerys and Rhaegar--within living memory, I might add. To have them endure Viserys and Drogo (and Daenerys, because the best-case scenario is that she'll be viewed as the "mafia wife") only to spring the Aegon surprise on them at the last minute...it's too much.

Unless most of the Westerosi population (and all of Aegon's would-be competition) are slain, Aegon and every other Targaryen would be rejected offhand.

My thought -- and I feel the books support me in this -- was that:

• Viserys, Aegon, the Dothraki and the Golden Company were all supposed to invade Westeros together during an ongoing period of chaos and strife.
• Aegon's identity (which was always going to be doubted or disbelieved) gets the ultimate red stamp of approval from both Viserys and Daenerys
• Viserys will name Aegon his heir, making it so that there are two unwed males ready for dynastic marriage alliances.
• Drogo, Daenerys and the Dothraki would leave with all their plunder (and, unfortunately, slaves ) after the war was fought and won.
• Viserys would meet some unfortunate "accident" either during the great war or shortly after taking the Iron Throne (but definitely before having children)
• Aegon will become the King, sire 2-5 children and reign for many years before dying and being succeeded by the next generation.

And this is, of course, assuming that Viserys, Daenerys and Drogo would all just suddenly become passively compliant side characters in their own stories. This is also, of course, assuming that no one else like Jhaqo, Mago, Jorah, Mirri Maz Duur or Marwyn would be around to interfere with these plans.

On 10/15/2023 at 5:22 AM, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

But would the Golden Company be powerful enough to defeat the Dothraki? Or were they counting on support from Westerosi lords?

That's another reason why the whole "let's make Viserys the villain so that Aegon can be the hero" plan is stupid.

Whenever I hear or think about that plan, I can't help but think of all of the ways that it can backfire or just go wrong.

Even if the Golden Company is able to overpower the Dothraki with the support of Westerosi lords, how long will that take? And what kind of damage will be done?

Varys and Illyrio are some of the smartest guys in the series, but they have three serious problems. The first problem is that they keep making plans and contingencies to weaponize or exploit things that they don't even try to understand (i.e., the Dothraki, Tyrion, Daenerys). The second problem is that they don't prepare for the things that they either don't know or that is deemed irrelevant (i.e., the Others, the religion of R'hllor). The third -- and biggest -- problem is that they still think that they are teenage con artists that can still run game on everybody they encounter.

I really enjoy those characters, but I think that they are a menace.

On 10/15/2023 at 6:36 AM, sweetsunray said:

Chaos and division was always aimed at creating support from Westerosi lords.

In JonCon's chapter with the GC though we learn the GC was to meet up with the Dothraki, suggesting a united invasion. But Viserys was always supposed to be a patsy for Aegon, the man to lend more credence to the claim that Aegon is Rhaegar's son. If Doran had wed Arianne to the patsy Viserys, she would have been wed to an abuser who likely feels as much disdain for Dorne as he does for Dothraki and end up in the thick of it when Aegon and Viserys end up fighting one another.

That's another thing.

Doran waits too long to do anything, and Arianne is perpetually misinformed.

[sweetsunray]

8 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

I don't think Viserys and the Dothraki alone were meant to create chaos and destabilize Westeros just to enable Aegon and the Golden Company to be seen as heroes.

Agreed. As I already mentioned, JonCon's first chapter confirms that at least in the minds of the GC, one of the iterations of Illyrio's plan was that they were to unite with Viserys and the Dothraki.

[sweetsunray]

8 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

Varys and Illyrio are some of the smartest guys in the series, but they have three serious problems. The first problem is that they keep making plans and contingencies to weaponize or exploit things that they don't even try to understand (i.e., the Dothraki, Tyrion, Daenerys). The second problem is that they don't prepare for the things that they either don't know or that is deemed irrelevant (i.e., the Others, the religion of R'hllor). The third -- and biggest -- problem is that they still think that they are teenage con artists that can still run game on everybody they encounter.

I really enjoy those characters, but I think that they are a menace.

Oh totally agree. Varys may believe he's doing it for the good of the realm, but can he still say that with a straight face to the people in the Riverlands, the Northerners, the people disappearing into the Red Keep's belly as Qyburn's playthings. In the end, Varys and Illyrio treat humans like objects as much as LF does, and their meddling has led to civil wars several times costing many lives. Varys even had a finger in the events that led to Robert's Rebellion, by feeding Aerys' paranoia.  Just putting Cersei back into power is a crime against humanity imho.

Another example on how they weaponize or exploit what they don't understand: dragon eggs, Selmy, Stark pack.

I will relish the moment when Illyrio's fate is sealed because the girl he believed would die in the Dothraki sea realizes how little she and her brother truly meant to lllyrio in comparison to Aegon. Varys needs to survive long enough to learn that Ned Stark outdid Varys in various way by raising Jon Snow: humbler than Aegon, best kept secret under their very noses, knows his priorities, and without plotting to plunge the realm into civil war to put him on an ugly throne.

[BlackLightning]

4 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

Oh totally agree. Varys may believe he's doing it for the good of the realm, but can he still say that with a straight face to the people in the Riverlands, the Northerners, the people disappearing into the Red Keep's belly as Qyburn's playthings. In the end, Varys and Illyrio treat humans like objects as much as LF does, and their meddling has led to civil wars several times costing many lives. Varys even had a finger in the events that led to Robert's Rebellion, by feeding Aerys' paranoia.  Just putting Cersei back into power is a crime against humanity imho.

Another example on how they weaponize or exploit what they don't understand: dragon eggs, Selmy, Stark pack.

I will relish the moment when Illyrio's fate is sealed because the girl he believed would die in the Dothraki sea realizes how little she and her brother truly meant to lllyrio in comparison to Aegon. Varys needs to survive long enough to learn that Ned Stark outdid Varys in various way by raising Jon Snow: humbler than Aegon, best kept secret under their very noses, knows his priorities, and without plotting to plunge the realm into civil war to put him on an ugly throne.

Right

Illyrio is going to die in either Daenerys' last chapter or her second-to-last chapter in The Winds of Winter. He'll probably be burned with dragonflame, but Daenerys is going to be pissed so Drogon might end up eating him alive.

Varys and Doran both definitely have to survive long enough to see things blow up in their face. Doran's issue is the fact that he bet on the wrong horse and that he should've made his play during the early stages of the War of the Five Kings, if not the moment he heard of Daenerys' marriage to Khal Drogo. Doran (and by extension, Arianne) are in the funny position of both waiting too long and then not waiting long enough.

Varys, on the other hand, needs to see that Ned Stark outdid him not just in raising Jon Snow but in also raising Sansa, Arya and Bran. He also needs to:

1. see the entire realm suffer as a direct or indirect consequence of putting his cookie-cutter king in charge
2. be powerless to fix it

And then of course, there are the Others, the Greyjoys and the Lannisters.

I don't expect him to die until the second half of A Dream of Spring.

I always imagined Littlefinger being slain by the Others, but Varys I think will be cut down by either greyscale, R'hllorists or dragonfire.

[sweetsunray]

5 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

Illyrio is going to die in either Daenerys' last chapter or her second-to-last chapter in The Winds of Winter. He'll probably be burned with dragonflame, but Daenerys is going to be pissed so Drogon might end up eating him alive.

aDwD foreshadows his death image both in Tyrion's POV as well as Quentyn's: a fat whale's body floating ashore with cleaved off fingers to get his rings.

Quote

Above him loomed a grotesque fat man with a forked yellow beard, holding a wooden mallet and an iron chisel. His bedrobe was large enough to serve as a tourney pavilion, but its loosely knotted belt had come undone, exposing a huge white belly and a pair of heavy breasts that sagged like sacks of suet covered with coarse yellow hair. He reminded Tyrion of a dead sea cow that had once washed up in the caverns under Casterly Rock.

The fat man looked down and smiled. "A drunken dwarf," he said, in the Common Tongue of Westeros.

"A rotting sea cow." Tyrion's mouth was full of blood. He spat it at the fat man's feet. 

[...]Illyrio was reclining on a padded couch, gobbling hot peppers and pearl onions from a wooden bowl. His brow was dotted with beads of sweat, his pig's eyes shining above his fat cheeks. Jewels danced when he moved his hands; onyx and opal, tiger's eye and tourmaline, ruby, amethyst, sapphire, emerald, jet and jade, a black diamond, and a green pearl. I could live for years on his rings, Tyrion mused, though I'd need a cleaver to claim them. (aDwD, Tyrion I)

One of the corpses was so fat that the ship's cook had to cut his fingers off with a meat cleaver to claim his rings. It took three Meadowlarks to roll the body into the sea. The other pirates were chucked in after him, without a word of prayer or ceremony. (aDwD, The Merchant's Man)